NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the time

Discuss local, regional, state, federal, and world politics. Keep it classy, Cleveland.

NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the time

Postby Michaels153 » December 26th, 2019, 9:04 am

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/12/25/ny-post-columnist-we-should-investigate-why-the-new-york-times-is-wrong-all-the-time-n2558526
As reported by Matt Vespa

Now I will be the first to admit the use of hyperbole here in the NY Post column. The Times does report the weather, sports and other areas with a fair amount of accuracy. But the gist of this column is an interesting note and begs the question of why? Why would what almost is not questioned; why would America's best paper, accept the endless false reporting they have done, losing readership, and advertisers, and staff, and not stop it. And I do believe that the false reporting can be stopped, immediately.

Someone mentioned this on social media. In fact, many have when it comes to The New York Times and others peddling caught peddling fake news. I mean it’s become abysmal since the 2016 election. Granted, a blind squirrel finds a nut. The publication can dole out some solid pieces—not doubt. The Upshot is a decent section, but the batting average isn’t good. And yes, it’s a liberal paper. I’m sure you all know this but there are some folks out there who think the NYT, MSNBC, and CNN are impartial sources of news. You almost have the chuckle a bit. Yet, when you get egg on your face for the 10,000thtime, maybe there needs to be an internal review. That’s what The New York Post’sMichael Goodwin suggested due to the paper’s serial failures while adding that Trump is Teflon. He will not be taken down by the snowflake brigade that infests so many newsrooms. He also added that if Democrats thought their liberal media allies will be able to drum up support for impeachment, they were sadly mistaken (via NY Post):

Backed by a press corps eager to get Trump, Pelosi felt confident to authorize the flimsy effort to remove the president from office. She assumed media bullhorns would push the public into her camp and that would win her Republican votes for a bipartisan takedown.

She certainly got the media support, but the public and the GOP aren’t following. Indeed, the harder that Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler push and the louder the anti-Trump media scream, the more the public resists impeachment over the Ukraine piffle.

That was true even before last week’s sensational revelations that the FBI was both corrupt and incompetent in the Russia collusion probe. The report and testimony by Michael Horowitz, the inspector general of the Justice Department, further undermined impeachment by revealing the rampant misconduct in the earlier case.

[…]

Thankfully, the accountability fallout from the Russia misconduct has started, with Attorney General Bill Barr suggesting possible prosecutions of FBI agents and perhaps others.

But what of the media? After all, The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and the broadcast networks were spectacularly wrong in their coverage.

[…]

Pulitzers and other journalism prizes lionized some reports that are now as discredited as the Steele dossier. Yet the news organizations still protect the secret sources who misled them and act as if they themselves did nothing wrong.

One glaring example. The Times reported last May that the FBI sent a female investigator “posing as research assistant” to spy on the Trump campaign in 2016. The woman, who called herself Azra Turk, met with George Papadopoulos in a London bar.

[…]

The Times’ story also says Turk and another informant, Stefan Halper, “failed to glean any information of value” from several meetings with Papadopoulos, but that is not true, according to the inspector general. He says one of the FBI’s most significant “inaccuracies and omissions” was the failure to tell FISA judges that Papadopoulos repeatedly denied to Halper and Turk that the campaign was collaborating with Russia or WikiLeaks. This is the equivalent of Brady material. The Woods process of examining the accuracy of all the material in each FISA warrant renewals. These were not done as IG Horowitz's report revealed. I am still not certain that the New York Times has admitted this.

Did the Times reporters know about that exculpatory information, or did their FBI sources lie to them? Either way, the paper now knows its May story was wrong on key points, yet it remains uncorrected. Again, why? Is there really more money to be gained from printing lie after lie when eventually the truth is found out? I just can not see a logical reason for this. If there are an endless supply of advertisers to replace any you might lose along the way, then why are you making cut backs in staffing? Why are they hinting at going more and more digital?

[…]

Days after the 2016 election, the Times issued an apology of sorts to subscribers for failing to realize that Trump could win. “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?” the publisher and editor wrote.

[…]

So now it’s time for a second apology — a sincere one. And an honest inquiry into how the paper continues to get the big stories so wrong.
Such an apology is long overdue, but even being the optimist that I am, I just do not see the NY Times issuing this type of an apology.

I mean the list of how many times the liberal media has stepped on a rake when covering this administration could stretch from New York to San Francisco. It’s got to the point where even voters who lean Democratic in swing states refuse to believe what’s being printed about the president. It’s that bad.

It really is that bad. I asked Leftyg, in another thread, why should anybody believe anything the Democratic Party says anymore, and I think the same thing should be asked of The New York Times. Yes there are other papers, magazines, radio, and television stations that could be asked the same thing. To the public, the basic question to them is: If ...X... is willing to lie so often about the big stuff, what else may they be lying about?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 26th, 2019, 7:23 pm

Michaels, it is the news you listen to on Fox and Rush Limbaugh that is propaganda. All you are giving me is opinion from an opinion writer at the highly partisan, highly questionable Townhall website. I don't want to do this little tit for tat on one claims after another that you often throw out. I think it is much more effective to debate one or two ideas at a time but do them in more depth. I think that is how we can build a readership over here, and I think that is what you want as well as me.

Matt Vespa's argument is not very convincing. The NY Times depends on factual information as do CNN and MSNBC Some of Mr. Vespa's assertions make me question whether he presents factual assertions himself. He talks about the NY Times "serial failures." Calling the impeachment evidence "flimsy" is silly. Trump did in fact ask Ukraine to "help us" before aid was released. New documents showed that 90 minutes after Trump's July 25th call to Zelensky, aides at Trump's White House attempted to put the aid on hold https://fox8.com/2019/12/22/effort-to-f ... -zelensky/ And those assertions are merely confirmed by other behind the scenes machinations. Mick Malvaney admitted to this in this video https://www.npr.org/2019/10/17/77097965 ... -conflicts The time line is suspicious at best https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... stleblower And Trump himself said that he would accept help from a foreign country in his interview with George Stephanopolous when he told Stephanopolous that "I think I would take it" in reference to a question about whether he would take political help from a foreign country against a domestic political opponent. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-excl ... d=63669304 So calling Peosi's evidence flimsy is weak at best.

Vespa asserts (without backup that Pelosi
assumed media bullhorns would push the public into her camp and that would win her Republican votes for a bipartisan takedown... but the public and the GOP aren’t following.
which of course is simley not true. Most polls have support for impeachment at around 50% https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/2 ... ent-088812

Contrast this with 1998 when a vast majority of the public did not want impeachment of Bill Clinton
[T]he majority of Americans (64%) did not support impeachment. And three days before Mr. Clinton was impeached, his approval rating was a high 63%, according to Gallup.
Sp Vespa, like Trump, is lying. Conservatives do not want to admit that in some legitimate polls as high a s 55% of the public want Trump impeached and removed from office https://www.businessinsider.com/poll-ma ... ed-2019-12
leftyg
 
Posts: 5456
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » December 27th, 2019, 8:19 am

Good morning Leftyg.
First, you still cling to your position of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh being propaganda. Your wrong. And your continued obstinance in this is not flattering. If The New York Times was as accurate as Fox and Rush have been over the past three years, they would not be going through the problems they have, and continue to have. And, behind closed doors, If their accuracy was in a pill form they would buy it.
I too, do not want a tit for tat dialogue between us over this or any other issue. We have had some very good discussions on some issues and I would like us to return to that point.
Now as to this column, that Matt Vespa is reporting on. (He was not the author, the NY Post was. He is just commenting on it)
You may recall that for me this is not a new topic. I have not been targeting the NY Times, but I have come out against the increasing number of false reporting wherever it occurs, especially in science. I recently offered my solutions in Remedy for Fake News.
All that being said, We come down to the commentary on the Times. Do you think they are becoming as CNN is now? Accepting both as liberal leaning, they both seemed to be agenda driven when it comes to President Trump.
Is it not fair to ask where this is all going? And, when will it end?
Bill Kristol committed journalistic suicide in his ant-trump agenda with his magazine. George Will has been relegated to his the closet in his basement.
So, again, I ask you, where do you think this is going?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 27th, 2019, 12:48 pm

I think that the New York Times' biases are wherever the facts are at. I think the same is true of most news organizations. Conservative anger at the messenger is quite funny. Journalists re going to report what they find. That is not true of columnists and talk show hosts. They generally follow their biases. Also it occurs to me that you would be much further ahead going after the New York Post because it is a tabloid type journal.

What false statements has the NY Times made? Most of the stuff on science is opinion. Neither side can lie on Evolution because it is a theory and because most people really do not know what they are talking about anyway, and ignorance is always a way out of being called a liar.

But what about current events or politics have they lied about? Be specific.. Like I said, Matt Vespa or the New York Post were both wrong about the "flimsy" evidence against Trump. The evidence was factual and well documented with Trump even admitting he would do it and did do it to ABC News and to the entire press corp on the White House lawn and through his own chief of staff.

There is no need to remedy Fake News at the New York Times because I have not seen any and you have not alerted me to any.

The Fake News is with Trump, and I choose to call it propaganda. He and his emissaries are the purveyors. That is why I regularly go after Bob Frantz. But the flat out falsehoods are stunning. Trump says the economy was a mess when he took over which is not true. Unemployment rates were dropping, deficits were dropping. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-s ... t-rate.htm

It is profoundly irresponsible to say that President Obama was not a citizen https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/09/politics ... index.html https://www.politifact.com/subjects/oba ... tatements/ Why did Trump tell these vicious and baseless lies? The proof that Trump is lying is that Obama has an Hawiian birth certificate https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8191566&page=1

And what about the absurd assertion that Obama bugged Trump's headquarters in Trump Tower? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/us/p ... hones.html Here the Times takes a Trump lie and corrects it. He had no evidence that Obama bugged his residence; he just made it up. He cannot go around lying and making false charges about people.

You mention Bill Kristol and George Will. Both are intelligent conservatives who cannot stand the constant violations of the Constitution. Their integrity is intact. The question is have those who cling on to Trump still have their integrity, and to me the answer is a resounding "no!"
leftyg
 
Posts: 5456
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » December 28th, 2019, 2:47 pm

Okay i was wrong. there is no chance in having a good conversation with you.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 29th, 2019, 2:05 am

Okay i was wrong. there is no chance in having a good conversation with you.
I addressed several of your ideas about the "lies' the NY Times allegedly tells. How then can you say that you cannot have a good conversation with me. I probably will not agree with you, but what you said was unfair.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5456
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 31st, 2019, 12:52 am

Crickets from Michaels. I guess he chooses not to defend his hero.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5456
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 8th, 2020, 1:36 pm

leftyg wrote: #1) I think that the New York Times' biases are wherever the facts are at. ...

October 25, 2019 - The Times reported that Durham's probe was politically tainted without evidence. (Durham's probe has not been released yet. The Times reported on Durham's probe, sight unseen. That is not "biases are wherever the facts are at") https://www.foxnews.com/politics/john-d ... inal-probe

#2) Journalists re going to report what they find.

Obviously if the Durham probe has not even been released yet and is sight unseen, then the Times reporter who said that Durham probe is tainted without evidence is not reporting on what they found.

#3) What false statements has the NY Times made?

The Times dismissed reporter Joe Drape whose original reports on the Duke Lacrosse Case tended to exonerate the accused players (who were falsely accused of Rape.) Mr Drape's reports contradicted the Times editorial stance. This led to Mr. Drapes quick dismissal. He was replaced by Duff Wilson who took a pro-prosecution stance. Ms. Selma Roberts was a sports writer for the Times and she made assertions that "something happened on March 13". She wrote: "Players have been forced to give up their DNA, but to the dismay of the investigators, none have come forward to reveal an eyewitness account." That was not true. [When Peer Pressure, Not a Conscience, Is Your Guide. by Selena Roberts New York Times, March 31, 2006. On April 6, 2006 The Times printed a correction to this false statement.
Daniel Okrent, former Times Ombudsman admitted to the bias in the Times coverage of the case. He said; "It was too delicious a story. It conformed too well to too many preconceived notions of too many in the press: White over Black, rich over poor, athletes over non-athletes, men over women, educated over non-educated. Wow! That's a package of sins that really fit the preconceptions of a lot of us.
See also: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-w ... e-coverage
New Book destroys credibility of New York Times Duke Lacrosse Coverage.

On February 21, 2008 The New York Times published an article on John McCain'. In the article it stated that Mr. McCain had an inappropriate relationship with Vicki Iseman. Tom Rosentiel, the director of the Project for Excellence In Journalism, suggested "the article does not make clear the nature of McCain's inappropriate behavior. The phrasing is just so vague. The Times also included in this article a reference to the Keating Five scandal (which both John McCain and John Glenn were cleared of any wrong doing.) Clark Hoyt, the Times public editor, concluded: I think it is wrong to report the suppositions or concerns of anonymous aides about whether the boss is getting into the wrong bed."
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opin ... ed.html?hp What the McCain Article Didn't Say by The Public Editor Clark Hoyt
The newspaper found itself in the uncomfortable position of being the story as much as publishing the story, in large part because, although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics — sex — it offered readers no proof that McCain and Iseman had a romance.

Vicki Iseman sued the New York Times. Wikipedia reports that the suit was settled in February 2009.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/busi ... wsuit.html
The Times agreed to publish a statement from Ms. Iseman's lawyer on the Times website. There was no inappropriate relationship. That was false.

#4) But what about current events or politics have they lied about? Be specific..
https://www.foxnews.com/media/cenk-uygur-david-duke-new-york-times-lie
Cenk Uygar slams "unconscionable' New York Times report suggesting he defended David Duke, calling it a Lie. By Joseph A. Wulfsohn of Fox News
The Times reported on an interview that Mr. Uygar had done on his progressive digital outlet The Young Turks with David Duke. In that interview, Mr. Duke ends the interview saying, "I am not, what you call a racist." to which Mr. Uygar replies: "No, of course not." which appeared to have been said sarcastically. Time reporter Jennifer Medina, nor the Times, immediately responded to Fox News for comment. (Mr. Uygar sent a tape of the show to this reporter at the Times so that she could see the entire interview)

#5) There is no need to remedy Fake News at the New York Times because I have not seen any and you have not alerted me to any.

In 2003, The Times admitted that Jayson Blair, one of its reporters, had committed repeated journalistic fraud over a span of several years. The general professionalism of the paper was questioned.
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/nati ... &position=
Correcting the Record: Times reporter who resigned leaves long trail of deception. By The New York Times
- Wikipedia "The New York Times Controversies" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_controversies
No need to remedy? Where was the oversight to check the facts and the sources before his work went to print?

In 1920, Walter Lippman and Charles Merz investigated the New York Times news coverage of the Russian Revolution from 1917 to 1920.
Liberty and the News. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-13636-3.
The study was published a s a supplement to the New Republic and concluded that the Times reporting was neither unbiased nor accurate. The newspapers news stories were not based on facts, but were determined by the hopes of the men who made up the news organisations. The newspaper referred to events that had not taken place, atrocities that did not exist, and reported no fewer than 91 times that the Bolshevik regime was on the verge of collapse. Lippmann and Merz noted critically: "The main censor and the main propagandist was the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."
Auerbach, Jonathan; Castronovo, Russ (November 13, 2013). The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-933185-7.


In 1990, The New York Times, which submitted the work of Walter Duranty for the Pulitzer Prize in 1932, wrote: "In his later articles denying the famine constituted some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper. https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage. ... A966958260 The Editorial Notebook: Trenchcoats, Then and Now. The New York Times Editorial on Walter Duranty
The Times sent Von Hagen's report to the Pulitzer Board and left it to the board to take whatever action they considered appropriate.
https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/20 ... tzer_x.htm New York Times urged to rescind 1932 Pulitzer
In a letter accompanying the report, The New York Times publisher Arthur Ochs Salzberger Jr. called Duranty's work "slovenly" and said it should have been recognized for what it was by his editors and by his Pulitzer judges seven decades ago.


August 15, 2019 New York Times chief outlines coverage shift: From Trump-Russia to Trump Racism. By Byron York.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2019/08/16/nyt_chief_on_trump_coverage_shift_from_russia_to_racism_483457.html
Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently, that, after the Mueller Report, the paper has to shift the focus of it's coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.
We built our newsroom to cover one story and we did it well, Baquet said....That was a really hard story by the way, let's not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story. I'm going to say it, we won two Pulitzer Prizes covering that story. (Remember Walter Duranty)
....Baquet used the gentlest terms possible - "the story changed" - but the fact is, the conspiracy - coordination allegation the Times had devoted itself to pursuing turned out to be false.
Two more questionable Pultizer Prizes, and the two that Mr. Baquet refers to were on a false story.
They got two Pulitzers for their false reporting. (and I am being very charitable here by leaving it as false)


Leftyg, you said, "* -> The Fake News is with Trump, and I choose to call it propaganda.
Lippmann and Merz noted critically: (referring to their investigation of the New York Times) -> " "The main censor and the main propagandist was the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/trump-iran-media.html
"Trump Has Made Us All Stupid. The Decline of Discourse In The Anti-Trump Echo Chamber" by David Brooke

I didn't say it. This is his column, from the New York Times.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 14th, 2020, 12:09 pm

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/478025-harvard-professor-sues-nyt-over-epstein-donations-story
Harvard professor sues NYT over Epstein donations story
BY HARPER NEIDIG - 01/13/20 02:18 PM EST

Remember: "All the news that's fit to print."

A Harvard law professor is suing The New York Times, accusing the paper of publishing "false and defamatory" information and employing "clickbait" in an article about him.

Lawrence Lessig, the legal scholar and political activist, filed his lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Monday.

"Defendants’ actions here are part of a growing journalistic culture of clickbaiting: the use of a shocking headline and/or lede to entice readers to click on a particular article, irrespective of the truth of the headline," he wrote in the lawsuit. "Defendants are fully aware that many, if not most, readers never read past the clickbait and that their takeaway concerning the target of the headline is limited to what they read in the headline."

He contends that the Times published false information about him in the headline and lede of an article about an essay he had written regarding Jeffrey Epstein's donations to MIT.

The headline on the story reads, "A Harvard Professor Doubles Down: If You Take Epstein’s Money, Do It in Secret," and the first line of the story is "it is hard to defend soliciting donations from the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard Law professor, has been trying."

The story, which includes an interview with Lessig, references an essay he wrote arguing that institutions like MIT are right to keep certain donations private.

But he argues that he was not making the case for taking money from people like Epstein, a convicted sex offender who was facing trial for sex trafficking when he was found dead in his jail cell last year. Lessig says that his point was that if an institution is going to take money from criminals or unsavory figures, then the donor should remain anonymous.

"My essay said—repeatedly—that such soliciting was a 'mistake,' " Lessig wrote in a blog post announcing the lawsuit on Monday. "And more importantly, it was a mistake because of the kind of harm it would trigger in both victims and women generally."

Lessig said in the lawsuit that he asked the Times to change the headline and lede of the story but the paper refused.
A spokesperson for the Times told The Hill that the paper will "defend against the claim vigorously."

"Senior editors reviewed the story after Professor Lessig complained and were satisfied that the story accurately reflected his statements," said the spokesperson in a statement. "We plan to defend against the claim vigorously."


Remember Cenk Uygar and the New York Times publishing Harry Reid saying Governor Romney did not pay taxes for ten years.
The paper went from the front page motto of "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the Slime from the Times" The New York Times has fallen in readership behind the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Both Fox News and Rush Limbaugh average more listeners on a weekly basis than the New York Times average readership by sales.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 17th, 2020, 12:29 am

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-joe-scarborough-meghan-mccain-new-york-times
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough defends Meghan McCain, trashes NYT over 'embarrassing' op-ed
MSNBC star Joe Scarborough defended "The View" co-host Meghan McCain and slammed The New York Times over an "embarrassing" op-ed that declared that the ABC daytime show had a "Meghan McCain problem."...
While McCain received support from many on social media, her biggest defender was actually the "Morning Joe" co-host.

"What an embarrassing example of how the Left is becoming even more insular by the day. That is saying a lot," Scarborough began. "The Left owns most of American popular culture. And yet the existence of one moderately conservative woman poses a threat to civil discourse. Good Lord. What a joke."

Joe Scarborough

@JoeNBC
What an embarrassing example of how the Left is becoming even more insular by the day. That is saying a lot.

“Ms. McCain is the privileged product of conservative nepotism, capitalism and the American military-industrial complex.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/opin ... -ios-share … via @NYTOpinion

Meghan McCain on “The View.”
Opinion | ‘The View’ Has a Meghan McCain Problem
The daytime co-hosts’ heated bipartisan debates are played down as disagreement among friends. But the strain for “civility” is tiring.


Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the
Post by leftyg » December 30th, 2019, 11:52 pm
Remember this?
Crickets from Michaels. I guess he chooses not to defend his hero.

In this thread, Leftyg took issue with the NY Post column, made his opinion known about the NYT, asked for specifics for false statements in the NYT, and criticized other sources as propaganda.
As everyone can see, I responded by providing the evidence he wanted, and he has chosen not to comment about it. That is his choice.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm


Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron