search results matching tag: bipartisan

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (57)     Sift Talk (5)     Blogs (5)     Comments (194)   

Trumps Impeachment Lawyers Are Very Bad: A Closer Look

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

And there we are. The most bipartisan vote to convict a president by a factor of 7 proves insufficient.
I think this guarantees there will be a next time in the near future.
At least there’s a congressional record now of what happened.

Mordhaus said:

Let's say they actually get the votes, I still think it's a waste of time. They bar him from being elected again, but nothing can stop him from naming an 'heir'.

If you think about it, that is even worse than him running again. If he runs, he will still unite every liberal leaning person and most fence sitters against him. If he designates a person for his supporters to align behind, they will get the almost half of voters that voted for him AND a lot of the middle who might be sick of Biden/Dems by 2024.

A victory here is, at best, a moral one. It won't stop a future President of Trump's nature from trying the same thing because that is the way a person like him acts. It does nothing but provide a feel good moment while wasting more of my tax money.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Bwaaahahaha....
Sorry, I forgot anyone not a Trumptard ready to follow Trump and abandon the republican party at the drop of a hat is a RINO. You have lost your mind, buddy. Trumpsters are RINOs, lifelong conservatives, Republican back when Trump was partying with Clinton, decades before he switched parties to become a republican out of convenience, they are not the RINO, friendo.

Also, if you really could read, and really had read it, you would have read about the bipartisan commission intentionally including Trumpsters who had to be reminded that if Trump won they would have to convince many that he hadn't cheated, so needed to participate in the anti election fraud committee even though they didn't actually want it to exist.

What is that supposed to mean? Free and fair elections by any legal means is the American way, and the right thing. They are the foundation of any democracy. My forefathers died to secure the right to free and fair elections here. You're saying free and fair elections aren't worth the efforts it takes to maintain their freedom and fairness?
Free and fair by funding underfunded election offices, providing missing ppe, helping states send out applications for mail in ballots the Fed won't fund....you know, the kind of stuff Americans as a whole took for granted before Trump.
Trump and his cohorts went above and beyond trying everything imaginable to make the election as unfree and unfair as possible, the first president ever to work against free and fair elections in our country, I know it's normal in yours, Putin doesn't want elections at all.

It's like 10 poker players at the table and 2 collude to get new unmarked decks so no one can cheat...player 3-9 having no issue, and player 10 throwing a fit and claiming they're all cheating him, he really won all those hands he just lost, it's a fraud, he won't pay, and calling his crackhead buddies over to try to rob and kill the other 9.

bobknight33 said:

Not bipartisan ,, RINOs, Never Trumpers and leftest.

Free and fair election. NOT Free and not fair by any means.

It is like 9 guys sitting at at poker game all in cahoots to cheat player # 10 and player # 10 thinks all are in the game for themself.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

bobknight33 says...

Not bipartisan ,, RINOs, Never Trumpers and leftest.

Free and fair election. NOT Free and not fair by any means.

It is like 9 guys sitting at at poker game all in cahoots to cheat player # 10 and player # 10 thinks all are in the game for themself.

newtboy said:

Clearly you cannot read. The article is clear. The objective of the bipartisan group was not to win votes for either side, only to ensure a free and fair election in the face of the Trump administration's efforts to interfere and illegally sway results through lies, lawsuits, disinformation, voter suppression, and simple denial of reality and fact.

"There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. "


You are both dumb to try this lie, and a bold faced liar. You actually pointed us to your source that clearly says the exact opposite of what you claim. I'm pretty certain you didn't read it, because it's clear, and it calls you a liar too.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Clearly you cannot read. The article is clear. The objective of the bipartisan group was not to win votes for either side, only to ensure a free and fair election in the face of the Trump administration's efforts to interfere and illegally sway results through lies, lawsuits, disinformation, voter suppression, and simple denial of reality and fact.

"There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. "


You are both dumb to try this lie, and a bold faced liar. You actually pointed us to your source that clearly says the exact opposite of what you claim. I'm pretty certain you didn't read it, because it's clear, and it calls you a liar too.

bobknight33 said:

The left subverted the election and admitted it in the article.

They colluded with the media, big tech, local and state governments with the sole purpose to sway voters and block opposition on a national scale.

I can read but can you take you blinders off?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

OMFG...can you even fucking read?
From your article I found on my own.....

...the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding.

Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program.

For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election. The President spent months insisting that mail ballots were a Democratic plot and the election would be “rigged.” His henchmen at the state level sought to block their use, while his lawyers brought dozens of spurious suits to make it more difficult to vote–an intensification of the GOP’s legacy of suppressive tactics. Before the election, Trump plotted to block a legitimate vote count. And he spent the months following Nov. 3 trying to steal the election he’d lost–with lawsuits and conspiracy theories, pressure on state and local officials, and finally summoning his army of supporters to the Jan. 6 rally that ended in deadly violence at the Capitol.

You call that defrauding America? You are absolutely totally bat shit crazy, it describes a bipartisan effort defending democracy from Trump's baseless partisan attacks on it, on voting, and on truth....claiming if he doesn't win, it's rigged, if he wins, it's perfect. No where did anyone even imply voting machines defrauded anyone, it clearly states the obvious opposite, that they not only didn't have any serious issues, but also a physical paper backup that, in multiple recounts, still matched the results the machines gave.

You are such a non stop and just dumb liar. No doubt it effects your family life horribly.

bobknight33 said:

America was defrauded by these machines and the left.

And they openly admit it.
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Trump Defends Sedition Speech, Support for Impeachment Grows

newtboy says...

"these people are not going to take it any longer. They’re not going to take it any longer.
"We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn’t happen.
"Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal.
"we want to get this right because we’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed, and we’re not going to stand for that.
"Our media is not free. It’s not fair. It suppresses thought. It suppresses speech, and it’s become the enemy of the people. It’s become the enemy of the people.
"We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women. We’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.
"Today, we see a very important event though, because right over there, right there, we see the event going to take place. And I’m going to be watching, because history is going to be made.
"You will have an illegitimate president, that’s what you’ll have. And we can’t let that happen.
"we got to get rid of the weak congresspeople, the ones that aren’t any good, the Liz Cheneys of the world, we got to get rid of them. We got to get rid of them.
"The Republicans have to get tougher. You’re not going to have a Republican party if you don’t get tougher.
"We must stop the steal and then we must ensure that such outrageous election fraud never happens again,
"They want to come in again and rip off our country. Can’t let it happen.
"we fight. We fight like Hell and if you don’t fight like Hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.
"So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue,...The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. (ellipses = he loves PA Ave.)“

All dog whistle. Everyone there has stated clearly they’re there at the behest of the president because he said we have to fight to take our country back.

So dishonest, you bold faced liar. The media has played what he said constantly, unedited so your ilk can’t dismiss it by saying it’s edited against him. Just stop the bullshit lies, bob. Just because you don’t Ike reality doesn’t make it go away.

He did.
He’s been essentially indicted for it by the most bipartisan impeachment in history.

Every time he says the election was stolen is incitement. Every time he calls for reversing the outcome is incitement. Every time he says those not for him are traitors he’s inciting. Every time he says you have to fight hard or you will lose your country he’s inciting. Every time he says we have to stop the steal is incitement.

No point showing you again, you dismissed the last 47 times I showed you proof he’s attempting a coup. Why would you recognize the 48th?

Your fake outrage is the only BS here. He lost the election, he lost the recounts, he lost all 60 attempts to invalidate the election, he lost the coup, he lost impeachment, he’s just a loser. Good riddance. Go with him.

bobknight33 said:

Where in his speech did he incite rioting, mayhem, storming the gates or any acts of violence.
No dog whistles used either( just fake news to dump on trump)..Even teh media wont play what he said because there isn't anything there, just their fake spin.

He didn't.

If you think he did, show it.

You cant because it does not exist. Which means this fake impeachment is pure BS.

Republicans in 2018 Post-Midterm Elections

newtboy says...

I didn't come up with it. It was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. If you disagree , your beef is with them.

I'm sorry you are so ill informed. Perhaps out might try being less dismissive and insulting about your ignorance....but likely not.

Apparently it wasn't enough time for him to grasp the seriousness. It was barely enough time to staff the NSA. They briefed him a few times, but the "Osama Bin Laden preparing to attack" report went unread or at best unheeded. Again, this is according to the bipartisan Senate commission set up to determine what actually happened.

Edit: Andy Card, Bush's chief of staff - “The 9/11 Commission had said if there had been a longer transition and there had been cooperation, there might have been a better response, or maybe not even any attack,” the former chief of staff said.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/11/former-bush-chief-of-staff-cites-9/11-warns-about-slow-transition.html

The 9/11 Commission Report noted:
"[T]he 36-day delay cut in half the normal transition period. Given that a presidential election in the United States brings wholesale change in personnel, this loss of time hampered the new administration in identifying, recruiting, clearing, and obtaining Senate confirmation of key appointees."
The point is that delaying these processes such as obtaining background checks can create significant later delays in putting new officials into place and in some cases obtaining Senate confirmations. Delays in the transference of information with the incoming team can also obstruct the next administration’s ability to carry out existing and new policies.
Perhaps you're unaware, the Bush administration, like others before it, did not have its full national security team on the job until at least six months after it took office.

Plans like watch for groups of middle eastern men who suddenly have funds to move to America, especially those who want to learn to fly, but not take off or land. Plans like track Bin Laden's money and deny people he funds from entering the country. Plans like focus on his communications to learn what his plans were. Plans like take him out before he attacks. There were many plans, I'm sure most were classified but many just common sense.

Really, you never heard the intelligence community makes plans to deal with threats?! They might not have been successful at stopping an attack, but at least could have tried.

greatgooglymoogly said:

Wow, thanks for the laugh. I thought I had heard every 9/11 theory out there. Apparently 6 months wasn't enough time to brief Bush on the Al Qaeda threat, because his schedule was still backed up from the inauguration. And the FBI and CIA were just too polite to intrude on his time clearing brush on the ranch with a vital national security situation. LOL!!!

Also, what were these "plans for Osama?" Haven't heard that one either.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Who appoints a judge has nothing to do with their authority, good for you or all those Trump judges would be powerless come January....besides which, Brann is a registered Republican and a former member of the conservative Federalist Society. There's no appeal, he ruled Trump had no standing to bring the lawsuit, no evidence, and no case.

Trump lost by a landslide of over 7 million votes...verified legal votes. Be a man, not a crybaby sore loser, and come to terms with it. He lost. Bipartisan election officials have certified in every state that there was no democratic cheating scheme, OAN and Newsmax are lying to you. He was ahead only if you don't count Democratic votes. He's never had a single victory by vote. Never.

Just lost his Nevada challenge too....not that it matters. Pennsylvania clinches it for Biden.
Edit: and Michigan and Georgia.

What did Trump do in 4 years to secure election integrity. According to you, less than nothing and both elections under Trump were disasters. He claimed massive fraud from day one, spent millions investigating, yet found none and did nothing to stop any.
Who doesn't care about election security? Democrats tried multiple times to create an unchangeable paper trail of every vote, Republicans blocked it and every other plan to make elections more secure. You are again confused about which party tried to act to protect America and which blocked protections.

bobknight33 said:

You think some Obama appointed judge be the final say, you are sadly mistaken.

Trump might lose but not yet.


Trump did have a landslide victory but Democrats well being Democrats cheated the shit out of the election.

But hey when did Democrats ever car about election integrity?

Traffic Stop

newtboy says...

What? Are you replying to another post? What do bad acts not excusing bad acts have to do with court packing? You are arguing that republican court packing isn't a bad act, so what are you talking about?

Republican court packing, the unprecedented denying dozens of a sitting presidents nominees a hearing despite the constitution stating they shall hold one in order to steal court seats was arguably unconstitutional but worked because they had the power and democrats had no recourse to remedy the crime since they didn't have the votes to force them to adhere to the constitution.

Adding seats is not unconstitutional nor is it unprecedented, the founding fathers did it themselves repeatedly. Not holding hearings for a nominee is unconstitutional, congress SHALL, not can or may.

No, they ignored a clear constitutional obligation knowing they couldn't be forced to follow it. Senate rules did not allow that, but a majority allowed the laws and rules to be ignored.

Lol. "Trashing them" by asking them to answer questions and accusations pertinent to the job is the same to you as denying a hearing in your opinion?!? I suppose you feel the same about republicans trashing democratic appointments, even outright denying them hearings required by the constitution....nominees who have NEVER had a problem clearly describing the rights codified in the constitution, which is the job they're nominated for...right...because certainly you aren't just a hypocrite.

🤦‍♂️

So, republicans played hardball by ignoring their constitutional obligation to hear nominees to steal seats, now you're whining that Democrats shouldn't play constitutionally allowed hard ball too by increasing the number of seats?!? Oh shit...you done fucked up.

I refer you to this page to see the list of Obama nominees trashed, refused, stalled, and or filibustered by Republicans....dozens of empty seats stolen by McConnell and handed to Trump to fill.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_judicial_appointment_controversies

Also, turnabout IS fair play. Bad acts by one group do excuse similar bad acts against them.

Edit: I see it this way....Republicans have set the bar for governing at "you can't stop us"...Democrats need at least 4 years in the same position to reverse the damage, probably 8 since they're so wishy washy and don't often play hardball....Biden is still talking about bipartisan committees to figure out how to get back to working civil governance, starting with balancing the supreme court...but what's needed is pure partisanship like Republicans display. Nasty, ruthless, unethical, even illegal partisanship at every turn on every issue.

A few judicial assassinations aren't off the table either. Anything goes is the rule of the day, thanks Trump.

drradon said:

you are free to guess, and will certainly be wrong...

Bad acts by members of one group don't justify worse acts by the opposing group. That road leads to genocide...

And the Republicans didn't "pack" the supreme court - they exercised the authority that the Constitution and Senate rules afforded them - no less so than the Democrats used their authority and rights to trash every supreme court nominee that has been put forth by Republican administrations. If you want to play hardball, you won't get much sympathy from me when you complain that the opposition elects to play hardball too...

Happy to see this clip disappear...

Fastest, Easiest Way To Understand The Impeachment Report

newtboy says...

100% Russian propaganda from the Kremlin tied propaganda network.

So much for the excuse that the investigation didn't happen so there's no bribery, right? Apparently it's been ongoing since Giuliani started pushing them in 2016, but the prosecutor investigating was just fired, having found no Biden crimes, so a new investigation can start with a focus on Biden, who's not accused of anything criminal, his boss is.

Bobski, if receiving money from corrupt Ukrainians is a problem, it's one Trump has far worse than Biden....who won't be the nominee anyway. Trump as president directly took truckloads of Ukrainian money from Russian tied Ukrainian separatists, our enemies, (they've been forced to admit it) then did their bidding, firing an ambassador that stopped some of their corruption.

Biden worked for a company run in part by a man that had previously been accused of using his Ukrainian government position to self deal, a crime that's exactly like what the Trumps have done in China, Scotland, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Canada, and elsewhere. His father, Joe, as part of an official public bipartisan American and international policy then pushed to remove the corrupt prosecutor that man had bribed to drop the corruption case. It's asinine to pretend he pushed to remove the prosecutor to protect his son or his son's boss, to do that he just needed to sit back and let the corrupt prosecutor stay. Only morons repeat this nonsense.

Facts? You don't understand the term, obvious from your posting anything from OAN, the Kremlin's news network that hires Kremlin employed propagandists. *facepalm

bobknight33 said:

Facts??? Not quite.

On the other hand ...

Pallbearer Snub Mitch McConnell At Elijah Cummings' Memorial

newtboy says...

Lol. You think you know his political affiliation....why?

He was not a pallbearer because of his chosen party, but because he was a personal friend of Cummings, who had made many close friends of Republicans thanks to his over abundance of class.

Sadly, republicans cannot stay classy, they abandoned their last vestige of class over a decade ago in a racist fervor over Obama along with their remaining morals and ethics.

The snub was because he blamed McConnell for personally blocking bipartisan legislation Cummings had sponsored, which aimed at ensuring veterans got the benefits they earned...a move Mr Rankin blamed for hastening his brother's death because he couldn't afford to properly fight his disease, multiple myeloma, brought on by drinking tainted drinking water during his military service. It was personal, not political. He shook the house minority leader's hand.

Jesusismypilot said:

Stay classy democrats.

Pallbearer Snub Mitch McConnell At Elijah Cummings' Memorial

newtboy says...

Some info about why....

Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, was intentionally snubbed by a pallbearer, Bobby Rankin, at the late congressman Elijah Cummings' memorial service at the Capitol on Thursday. The pallbearer walked down the line of attendees and shook hands with the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, and the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, before walking past McConnell to hug the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi.
Mr Rankin explained that his brother, who died exactly one year before the memorial service, like numerous servicemen contracted multiple cancers directly linked to drinking (well documented) contaminated water while he was stationed at camp Lejeune, and was denied his military benefits thanks in large part to McConnell personally blocking legislation Cummings had produced with bipartisan support that would have given those poisoned by the military's negligence during their military service the benefits they earned and were promised, and he could not shake hands with a "person" (and I use that term loosely) who would throw injured servicemen into a ditch after stealing their benefits.
Bravo, sir. Bravo.

White House Chief of Staff Admits Quid Quo Pro in Ukraine

newtboy says...

Everything I have ever said was irreverent.
Most of it is relevant.
It's sad but telling that you don't know the difference.

The fact that there was never an investigation of Biden's son for Biden to stop is relevant.
The fact that the prosecutor was removed for not prosecuting corruption, not to stop him from investigating corruption is relevant.
The fact that Biden said that with full international, and bipartisan American support, publicly, is relevant.

Conversely, the fact that Trump did it secretly, bypassing the official channels and officials by using his private lawyer for secret foreign policy that only benefits him is relevant.
The fact he withheld funding for personal, not official reasons nor in the national interest is relevant.
The fact he repeatedly requested foreign help with a campaign ploy is relevant.
The fact his family has taken more foreign money than he delusionally claims Biden made (but somehow doesn't have) is relevant.

The fact that I'll tell you to your face you have your head up your ass so consistently that you don't have to dye your hair anymore is irreverent.

bobknight33 said:

BS newt

To paraphrase Biden

Biden said if you want the 1 billion then fire your guy, you got 6 hours.

All you said is irreverent.

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

newtboy says...

Isn't that exactly what Trump said, that the investigation of him was illegal because Democrats were involved, making it partisan? That since what he claimed was the impetus (or as he says, the oranges) for the investigation was an imperfect dossier the whole thing was illegal?
The impetus for his Biden witch hunt is unambiguously a made up story by corrupt Ukrainians that doesn't fit the documented facts in the slightest, which every professional involved told him clearly, a fake story furthered directly by Trump in public.

In fact, it is hands off for the president. Using the power of the office to direct investigations of political rivals is impeachable.
Using the office to blackmail foreign powers to interfere in our election by starting false investigations for political reasons is a crime.
Taking foreign money in exchange for illegal and corrupt policies that are against the national interests but personally beneficial is treason. He has done exactly that.

But in YOUR mind, Treasonous Trump can do no wrong, and things that were treason when you baselessly claimed Democrats did them are patriotism when Trump brags about them. You can't even understand that Trump openly committed the very crime he was convinced by foreign criminals Biden committed...using the power of his office and public funds to pressure foreign investigations for personal gain...the difference being Trump did it secretly for personal political gains and was caught, Biden didn't do anything besides join international and bipartisan efforts to remove a corrupt prosecutor who wouldn't prosecute corruption. Trump removed a top notch anti corruption diplomat because she wouldn't push for a corrupt and baseless politically motivated investigation of his political rival, exactly what the corrupt Ukrainians had paid him to do.

Trump couldn't come up with any other corruption he wants investigated besides the Biden fantasy he was sold, and when asked exactly what he expected from Ukraine, he said he specifically expected them to investigate Biden, not fight corruption. Same for China, which was not a joke or trolling of the public, his trade advisor admitted he brought it up in official trade talks before he said it publicly.

You keep chanting 'he'll drain the swamp' ignoring he is the swamp thing, and the swampiest administration ever with more corruption convictions than any two administrations combined (an educated guess, might be >2) and more scandals than any 10 combined.

If I weren't sure you were a Russian troll only trying to sew division with ridiculous republican regurgitation of baseless claims based on delusion and corruption, I would be seriously worried about your mental state.

Edit: remember these days in 15 months. When Democrats control congress and the executive, the same "see no evil" tactics will be more than fair play. No matter how unconstitutional their actions might be, no matter how unacceptable, we will see no wrong....just cleaning up the Trump mess. Nothing to worry about.

bobknight33 said:

So in you mind as long as Joe is running for an office he is hands off from investigating.

Trump is not trying to get dirt of a candidate but to continue his effort to drain the swamp, which Joe seems to be neck deep in it.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon