"I hope somebody breaks a baseball bat over your head"

Page 8 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Scott SoCal said:
The world is a pretty big place. There are tons of success stories from folks who never spent one minute in college. Just because you have experience from one aspect of one industry does not mean much in the greater scheme of things.

Creed and Frankie are reasonably bright guys. My guess is Creed will be successful in whatever he decides to do. Frankie chooses to stay in cycling but he would be just fine outside of it.

Floyd? He's got a tough road to hoe, but it's not like he has no discipline or work ethic. He will find his way.

I don't know what TexPat does as a chosen profession but, from some of his posts, he seems quite content in NZ.
Steven Swart (ex USPS) went back to NZ and started in the building trade refurbishing property to sell and each new property was bigger than the previous and did well for himself.

yep, i imagine the hard training can be put to good use in 'real' life.
 
Benotti69 said:
Steven Swart (ex USPS) went back to NZ and started in the building trade refurbishing property to sell and each new property was bigger than the previous and did well for himself.

yep, i imagine the hard training can be put to good use in 'real' life.
He had a country to go back to. Most can only remain in the country whereby the biggiest man in cycling lives. That doesn't help.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Good post.

The thing I find strange about much of this is how much power is given to Lance by those in his periphery. Floyd finally let go and when Stephanie does her life will begin to get back on track.

It's as if these people think if they turn on Lance or the omerta they will be shot dead in the streets. There are lots of ways to make a living outside of cycling. At the end of the day these people would likely tell you none of this was worth it. My 2 cents.
One aspect that has not yet been discussed is how defendants in civil cases often skirt the rules - or even the law. I have personal experience in one where the defendant was not able to produce documentation based on a discovery request, and openly stated as the reason being that "his dog ate the documents". Lying under oath in civil cases has few consequences - and are rarely prosecuted by anyone, as the burden of proof for perjury is on the parties to the lawsuit. With no subpoena power this is often an impossible task.

So with this background it's perhaps easier to see why Stephanie felt the lesser of two bad choices was to lie in the SCA case. She was told there would be no legal consequences to her for sticking with her friend and with her business interests. Which was true if this case had stayed in civil courts. Who would have thought at the time that her testimony would come up again in a criminal investigation? She was given bad advise by her lawyers, pressured by Armstrong - and probably threatened by consequences if she had maintained her clear recollection about the hospital room incident.

I would agree the feds are more interested in learning who pressured her to provide false testimony in the SCA case - rather than yet another confirmation that Armstrong doped. They have enough evidence on that point already. And doping is not a crime - but witness tampering is. There's a good chance this won't be Stephanie's last appearance in front of a jury which must be adding to the pressures she's feeling. Given their relationship, there surely was direct communication between Stephanie and Lance prior to her SCA deposition. But does she choose to remember that? Any deal to allow her to testify with immunity would likely require that she tells the whole story, including the private conversations with Lance regarding this topic.

Stephanie may yet become the poster-girl for nailing Armstrong for a criminal offense.
 
Oct 24, 2009
61
0
0
NashbarShorts said:
Anything she'd have said might be no more reliable than anything uttered by Floyd or Lemond -- who we all know have drinking problems themselves :rolleyes:
Certainly can't vouch for Floyd, But having spent a lot of time with Greg and Kathy over the last 8 months, he has been nothing but sober.
 
Tubeless said:
One aspect that has not yet been discussed is how defendants in civil cases often skirt the rules - or even the law. I have personal experience in one where the defendant was not able to produce documentation based on a discovery request, and openly stated as the reason being that "his dog ate the documents". Lying under oath in civil cases has few consequences - and are rarely prosecuted by anyone, as the burden of proof for perjury is on the parties to the lawsuit. With no subpoena power this is often an impossible task.

So with this background it's perhaps easier to see why Stephanie felt the lesser of two bad choices was to lie in the SCA case. She was told there would be no legal consequences to her for sticking with her friend and with her business interests. Which was true if this case had stayed in civil courts. Who would have thought at the time that her testimony would come up again in a criminal investigation? She was given bad advise by her lawyers, pressured by Armstrong - and probably threatened by consequences if she had maintained her clear recollection about the hospital room incident.

I would agree the feds are more interested in learning who pressured her to provide false testimony in the SCA case - rather than yet another confirmation that Armstrong doped. They have enough evidence on that point already. And doping is not a crime - but witness tampering is. There's a good chance this won't be Stephanie's last appearance in front of a jury which must be adding to the pressures she's feeling. Given their relationship, there surely was direct communication between Stephanie and Lance prior to her SCA deposition. But does she choose to remember that? Any deal to allow her to testify with immunity would likely require that she tells the whole story, including the private conversations with Lance regarding this topic.

Stephanie may yet become the poster-girl for nailing Armstrong for a criminal offense.


Agreed on all fronts. Also the consequences of now not telling everything are much much greater than before. Because if she had changed her testimony they’ll want to know why. My only concern is she’s flaky. Although there is nice case building here… between the LeMond conversation to the contradicting statement made at the SCA trial to the angst ridden phone calls to Mrs. Andreu. I let you join the dots on this and make your on determination on what took place.

We should ask ourselves the question: what took place between the LeMond conversation and the SCA trial. I’m sure our good friends at the Feds are looking at phone records and bank statements in the intervening months as we speak to jog her memory. Along with any advancements in job positions, salary increases and the like. I would also add fraud and possibly embezzlement to witness tampering. As Armstrong took the case against SCA based upon lying himself and asking others to lie for him. 5 million is a lot of motivation. I’m not seeing the Oakley rep giving up her job and going to jail for a 12 months for anyone.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
thehog said:
Agreed on all fronts. Also the consequences of now not telling everything are much much greater than before. Because if she had changed her testimony they’ll want to know why. My only concern is she’s flaky. Although there is nice case building here… between the LeMond conversation to the contradicting statement made at the SCA trial to the angst ridden phone calls to Mrs. Andreu. I let you join the dots on this and make your on determination on what took place.

We should ask ourselves the question: what took place between the LeMond conversation and the SCA trial. I’m sure our good friends at the Feds are looking at phone records and bank statements in the intervening months as we speak to jog her memory. Along with any advancements in job positions, salary increases and the like. I would also add fraud and possibly embezzlement to witness tampering. As Armstrong took the case against SCA based upon lying himself and asking others to lie for him. 5 million is a lot of motivation. I’m not seeing the Oakley rep giving up her job and going to jail for a 12 months for anyone.
Here's the timeline:

July 2005 - Taped conversation between Stephanie & Greg
Fall 2005 - Stephanie's written deposition in the SCA case
Spring 2008 - Stephanie's messages on Betsy's answering machine

Stephanie sounded calm & collected in the July 2005 tape. The pressure must have been applied to her sometime thereafter. Greg can probably fill in the reasons why Stephanie went nuts in the messages to Betsy in the spring of 2008, likely right after Greg filed his lawsuit against Trek - no doubt additional pressure from Lance to try to influence witnesses to that litigation. Both cases would qualify as witness tampering attempts and would show a pattern of criminal behavior by Lance, often a key to make such charges stick. So Stephanie may indeed play a bigger role in this case than previously thought.

If Stephanie chooses to come clean and tells the whole truth, I believe she can come across as a very credible witness for the prosecution. She's educated and has held the same high-profile job for a long time. Being drunk on the one tape can easily be explained by the pressure from Lance. It's Armstrong's lawyers who would have to frame her as flaky and use the answering machine messages to try to prove their case to discredit her testimony. That would be interesting to watch / hear if it ever comes to that.

If the feds are looking for a 3rd civil court proceeding where Lance may have skirted the rules a bit, here's something he may have done to his ex Kristin as they were going through their divorce. And guess who'd know? It's Stephanie !!!

http://deadspin.com/217961/you-cannot-hide-from-lance-armstrong
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Tubeless said:
Here's the timeline:

July 2005 - Taped conversation between Stephanie & Greg
Fall 2005 - Stephanie's written deposition in the SCA case
Spring 2008 - Stephanie's messages on Betsy's answering machine

Stephanie sounded calm & collected in the July 2005 tape. The pressure must have been applied to her sometime thereafter. Greg can probably fill in the reasons why Stephanie went nuts in the messages to Betsy in the spring of 2008, likely right after Greg filed his lawsuit against Trek - no doubt additional pressure from Lance to try to influence witnesses to that litigation. Both cases would qualify as witness tampering attempts and would show a pattern of criminal behavior by Lance, often a key to make such charges stick. So Stephanie may indeed play a bigger role in this case than previously thought.

If Stephanie chooses to come clean and tells the whole truth, I believe she can come across as a very credible witness for the prosecution. She's educated and has held the same high-profile job for a long time. Being drunk on the one tape can easily be explained by the pressure from Lance. It's Armstrong's lawyers who would have to frame her as flaky and use the answering machine messages to try to prove their case to discredit her testimony. That would be interesting to watch / hear if it ever comes to that.

If the feds are looking for a 3rd civil court proceeding where Lance may have skirted the rules a bit, here's something he may have done to his ex Kristin as they were going through their divorce. And guess who'd know? It's Stephanie !!!

http://deadspin.com/217961/you-cannot-hide-from-lance-armstrong
Here's a better source for the last piece:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/editions/latest-cycling-news-for-november-27-2006
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
He had a country to go back to. Most can only remain in the country whereby the biggiest man in cycling lives. That doesn't help.
US of A is a big place and most only read local newspapers if at all and this story is hardly a CNN/fox type of news soundbite. I'm sure FL could easily lose himself if he wanted.
 
Benotti69 said:
US of A is a big place and most only read local newspapers if at all and this story is hardly a CNN/fox type of news soundbite. I'm sure FL could easily lose himself if he wanted.
This I love. In 2006 Armstrong was making all sorts of assurances to Floyd. He was speaking him on a weekly basis telling him to say nothing and that his silence would be rewarded. Where did that get him? Floyd Landis the name became a joke to the nation. The guy who wouldn’t admit to using drugs. The guy who tried all sorts of lies to weasel himself out of admitting that he doped. Problem being listening to Lance’s advice is what brings most people down. Floyd couldn’t lose himself. He tried that. He sat there in his cabin days on end speaking with no one. You know what that’s like? When every one who you come into contact with thinks you’re a loser because they once remembered you as the guy who wouldn’t admit or just a guy who lives in a cabin who can’t get a job. The guy won the Tour he’s a little more than just losing himself. I think that’s what most people wanted him to do. Something happened at the end of 2009 though. Some encouragement from a few to see a therapist assisted a great deal. Just talking about it helped a lot. In addition Lance’s new team there was opportunity for a spot on the team – even in a smaller capacity than before – these assurances had been made well into 2008 so why not? Well you saw what happened. It was payback time and comeback 2.0 didn’t want to ante up to his end of the bargain. The more Floyd talked the better he felt. So he kinda just kept on talking. First USA cycling – who said there was nothing in it. Then back to Armstrong and Bruyneel – still no job there. Finally he had to talk to those at the USADA and UCI. The UCI said there was nothing in the allegations and to stop talking or he’ll never ride again and will be sued. Don’t ask Landis to go lose himself because he did what he was told – he was for all parts the best team-mate Armstrong ever had. He kept his silence and for what? Think about it. Would you lose yourself?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
This I love. In 2006 Armstrong was making all sorts of assurances to Floyd. He was speaking him on a weekly basis telling him to say nothing and that his silence would be rewarded. Where did that get him? Floyd Landis the name became a joke to the nation. The guy who wouldn’t admit to using drugs. The guy who tried all sorts of lies to weasel himself out of admitting that he doped. Problem being listening to Lance’s advice is what brings most people down. Floyd couldn’t lose himself. He tried that. He sat there in his cabin days on end speaking with no one. You know what that’s like? When every one who you come into contact with thinks you’re a loser because they once remembered you as the guy who wouldn’t admit or just a guy who lives in a cabin who can’t get a job. The guy won the Tour he’s a little more than just losing himself. I think that’s what most people wanted him to do. Something happened at the end of 2009 though. Some encouragement from a few to see a therapist assisted a great deal. Just talking about it helped a lot. In addition Lance’s new team there was opportunity for a spot on the team – even in a smaller capacity than before – these assurances had been made well into 2008 so why not? Well you saw what happened. It was payback time and comeback 2.0 didn’t want to ante up to his end of the bargain. The more Floyd talked the better he felt. So he kinda just kept on talking. First USA cycling – who said there was nothing in it. Then back to Armstrong and Bruyneel – still no job there. Finally he had to talk to those at the USADA and UCI. The UCI said there was nothing in the allegations and to stop talking or he’ll never ride again and will be sued. Don’t ask Landis to go lose himself because he did what he was told – he was for all parts the best team-mate Armstrong ever had. He kept his silence and for what? Think about it. Would you lose yourself?
You misinterpreted what i meant i think!

Floyd did what he did because he turned to the only people he considered family bar 'blood family', although when you think about it they were 'blood brothers' in TeamLA and when he was not welcomed he cracked. Now it that is a mental condition that Floyd had to deal with. Wouldn't have mattered where he was. But when he gets his head together and wants to leave the world of cycling behind he can quite easily in my opinion go and live a quite life somewhere in the states. Whether he wants to leave cycling behind is another ?

If i was Floyd i would have done exactly the same thing in going public. But i would like to think i would never have ridden for LA in the first place.

Life sure aint easy for Floyd and I hope he finds his peace of mind and place.
 
thehog said:
This I love. In 2006 Armstrong was making all sorts of assurances to Floyd. He was speaking him on a weekly basis telling him to say nothing and that his silence would be rewarded. Where did that get him? Floyd Landis the name became a joke to the nation. The guy who wouldn’t admit to using drugs. The guy who tried all sorts of lies to weasel himself out of admitting that he doped.

Problem being listening to Lance’s advice is what brings most people down. Floyd couldn’t lose himself. He tried that. He sat there in his cabin days on end speaking with no one. You know what that’s like? When every one who you come into contact with thinks you’re a loser because they once remembered you as the guy who wouldn’t admit or just a guy who lives in a cabin who can’t get a job. The guy won the Tour he’s a little more than just losing himself.

I think that’s what most people wanted him to do. Something happened at the end of 2009 though. Some encouragement from a few to see a therapist assisted a great deal. Just talking about it helped a lot. In addition Lance’s new team there was opportunity for a spot on the team – even in a smaller capacity than before – these assurances had been made well into 2008 so why not? Well you saw what happened.

It was payback time and comeback 2.0 didn’t want to ante up to his end of the bargain. The more Floyd talked the better he felt. So he kinda just kept on talking. First USA cycling – who said there was nothing in it. Then back to Armstrong and Bruyneel – still no job there. Finally he had to talk to those at the USADA and UCI. The UCI said there was nothing in the allegations and to stop talking or he’ll never ride again and will be sued. Don’t ask Landis to go lose himself because he did what he was told – he was for all parts the best team-mate Armstrong ever had. He kept his silence and for what? Think about it. Would you lose yourself?


Hog, let's face it-maybe things would have turned out differently if Landis hadn't gone on that crusade after he was busted.

But even then I highly doubt it.

The Floyd Defense Fund, the book, the phone call from his then-manager to Lemond ridiculing him about his molestation-even giving him credit for keeping his mouth shut up to that point about the goings-on at US Postal, he still made a monumental mess of it.

Landis had to understand he was going to be a liability under the best of circumstances. But all that other stuff he pulled seriously compromised any hope of an eventual return.

Getting busted is one thing, but the unprecedented act of being the only rider in history to be stripped of his Tour title-regardless of promises made, it all was just too much.

I understand what you're saying and I'm not purposely trying to be a contrarian. I'm just saying with the hole Landis dug himself, I doubt anyone could have come out of that to regain a position in the European peloton, especially on a Pro Tour team.

I have a feeling maybe it was brought up and Fat Pat put the kibosh on it, just because it would have made a total and complete mockery of the sport.

Given the present set of circumstances, which are playing out like a Greek tragedy, I see no other plausible scenario than what is happening out right now.

It has ruined Landis, but in the now-inevitable destruction of the Armstrong myth, there really was no other way.
 
Hog, let's face it-maybe things would have turned out differently if Landis hadn't gone on that crusade after he was busted.

The Floyd Defense Fund, the book, the phone call from his then-manager to Lemond ridiculing him about the molestation issues-even giving him credit for keeping his mouth shut up to that point about the goings-on at US Postal, he still made a monumental mess of it.

Landis had to understand that he was going to be a liability under the best of circumstances, but all that other stuff he pulled put a different perspective on the overall situation.

Getting busted is one thing, but the unprecedented act of being the only rider in history to be stripped of his Tour title-regardless of promises made, it all was just too much.

I understand what you're saying and I'm not purposely trying to be a contrarian, but given the hole Landis dug himself, I doubt anyone could have come out of that to regain a position in the European peloton, especially on a Pro Tour team.

I have a feeling maybe it was brought up and Fat Pat put the kibosh on it, just because it would have made a total and complete mockery of the sport.

Given the present circumstances, which are playing out like a Greek tragedy, I see no other plausible scenario than what is happening out right now.

It has ruined Landis, but in the now-inevitable destruction of the Armstrong myth, there really was no other way.
 
Berzin said:
Hog, let's face it-maybe things would have turned out differently if Landis hadn't gone on that crusade after he was busted.

The Floyd Defense Fund, the book, the phone call from his then-manager to Lemond ridiculing him about the molestation issues-even giving him credit for keeping his mouth shut up to that point about the goings-on at US Postal, he still made a monumental mess of it.

Landis had to understand that he was going to be a liability under the best of circumstances, but all that other stuff he pulled put a different perspective on the overall situation.

Getting busted is one thing, but the unprecedented act of being the only rider in history to be stripped of his Tour title-regardless of promises made, it all was just too much.

I understand what you're saying and I'm not purposely trying to be a contrarian, but given the hole Landis dug himself, I doubt anyone could have come out of that to regain a position in the European peloton, especially on a Pro Tour team.

I have a feeling maybe it was brought up and Fat Pat put the kibosh on it, just because it would have made a total and complete mockery of the sport.

Given the circumstances, which are playing out like a Greek tragedy, I see no other plausible scenario than what is happening out right now.

It has ruined Landis, but in the now-inevitable destruction of the Armstrong myth, there really was no other way.
Well said and agree with what you said. Fat Pat did make promises as well. But Floyd listened to Lance. Your last line the most poignant.
 
May 13, 2009
692
1
0
Benotti69 said:
If i was Floyd i would have done exactly the same thing in going public. But i would like to think i would never have ridden for LA in the first place.

Life sure aint easy for Floyd and I hope he finds his peace of mind and place.
I would have gone public too. Hard to say about not riding for Armstrong, I mean, back in 02-03 we all knew the guy was a major piece of work. However, cycling is what these guys do for a living, and he was paying well, can't blame him for that.

Anyway, I hope he finds some peace and helps us all cleaning the sport.
 
I bet after such a deep drought, truth must be even more addictive than doping.
Why stop there, coming clean about himself? Who's the foremost person who took more than he gave, and let Landis down most? Lance wasn't an idol anymore when Floyd learned how he worked, but he still was loyal all his career. Then, end of career, why remain loyal to he who never proved worthy of even Floyd's presence?
Lance had to go down, and Floyd didn't want to risk is not happening due to yet more of passivity from his part. And oh it must be feeling great for him.
The way he showed up to that time trial ill prepared, just wearing a baggy t-shirt, you can tell the guy is loving cycling a pedal stroke at a time.
Sure he c***ed up just like everyone by falling for the temptation of easy wins. He is not unique that way. But seriously, wouldn't you guy want to go get a beer with this guy now? He's so much more of an idol if you think about it. His cycling performances are not required to like him.
Forget he's a cyclist or race winner, and what's there to like about Lance? Come on, there must be something.
No, there is not. Bullies go work in the mob, or get real lonely, or just switch to being nice to people.
Imagine you are just starting to be able to read, and learn about your father. You'll believe in his for a few more years. Since at times he comes to see you. Then you need to go see him, in jail. Can he still be your hero? Man, I pitty those kids. Why did he have to procreate like it was TdF wins, and drag them also into this, on top of the 28 million?
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Wow, Cloxx, that's a bit morose. The kids he had w/ Kristin will be fine, she seems like a quality woman and obviously no money worries. There will always be a roof over their heads!
 
Oct 7, 2009
15
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
It's great to see the rotten core exposed. Lance and his little minions have thrived under the cover of mendacity for too long.
Yeah! Frankie was a doper on the same team. Betsy is married to a professional cycling cheat. Minions of Lance, they are.
 
Oct 7, 2009
15
0
0
Cloxxki said:
I bet after such a deep drought, truth must be even more addictive than doping.
Why stop there, coming clean about himself? Who's the foremost person who took more than he gave, and let Landis down most? Lance wasn't an idol anymore when Floyd learned how he worked, but he still was loyal all his career. Then, end of career, why remain loyal to he who never proved worthy of even Floyd's presence?
Lance had to go down, and Floyd didn't want to risk is not happening due to yet more of passivity from his part. And oh it must be feeling great for him.
The way he showed up to that time trial ill prepared, just wearing a baggy t-shirt, you can tell the guy is loving cycling a pedal stroke at a time.
Sure he c***ed up just like everyone by falling for the temptation of easy wins. He is not unique that way. But seriously, wouldn't you guy want to go get a beer with this guy now? He's so much more of an idol if you think about it. His cycling performances are not required to like him.
Forget he's a cyclist or race winner, and what's there to like about Lance? Come on, there must be something.
No, there is not. Bullies go work in the mob, or get real lonely, or just switch to being nice to people.
Imagine you are just starting to be able to read, and learn about your father. You'll believe in his for a few more years. Since at times he comes to see you. Then you need to go see him, in jail. Can he still be your hero? Man, I pitty those kids. Why did he have to procreate like it was TdF wins, and drag them also into this, on top of the 28 million?
Landis was a doper. Plain and simple. A cheat and a liar. Taking money and lying again and again over the world airways. Why did his father-in-law go and off himself? Was it because Floyd tarnished the family name?
 
Mar 7, 2010
64
0
0
jbenedict said:
Landis was a doper. Plain and simple. A cheat and a liar. Taking money and lying again and again over the world airways. Why did his father-in-law go and off himself? Was it because Floyd tarnished the family name?
He admits to all that. Took balls to do so.

You however need to go back under that rock.

How much money did you give to FL?
 
Mar 7, 2010
64
0
0
jbenedict said:
Yeah! Frankie was a doper on the same team. Betsy is married to a professional cycling cheat. Minions of Lance, they are.
Did you comprehend the post you quoted? Frankie admitted to doping ONCE and regretted it. The minions of LA hide behind omerta and express no shame. Betsy is married to a man with a conscience.

Go find your rock...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
jbenedict said:
Yeah! Frankie was a doper on the same team. Betsy is married to a professional cycling cheat. Minions of Lance, they are.
Yes, it's a good time to play the moral relativism card.

It's a loser, but what the hell....
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
jbenedict said:
Why did his father-in-law go and off himself? Was it because Floyd tarnished the family name?
The man was a good friend of Floyd's, who Floyd then introduced to his girlfriend's mother. Both couples married. Father-in-law in name only. And what "family name" would you be referring to? Floyd's last name is Landis. Neither of the other three parties had the last name of Landis. Your post makes no sense, man.

From what I've heard, the man killed himself b/c he was under a lot of stress, business failure, etc. Floyd's positive was probably the last straw... He believed in the lie, and bought into the conspiracy theory BS of American-hating French lab workers..

As such, no doubt he saw his cycling idol's persecution as unfair, painful, an injustice of the highest cosmic order, and took it very personally.

Given the current mess LA is in, I don't suppose by any chance you can relate to these emotions?? Are you sure? There's help out there if you need it! :)
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Today is the big day. What will she say?

Now, one of his close associates, Stephanie McIlvain, has been summoned to appear before a federal grand jury in Los Angeles on Wednesday to clarify what he said to those doctors. McIlvain, a longtime liaison to Armstrong for Oakley Inc., one of his major sponsors, was there.
Never could have predicted the response

A member of Armstrong's legal team, Mark Fabiani, said Tuesday in an e-mail that, "It makes no sense to waste the money of taxpayers and the time of the FDA and the grand jury on very old issues that were long ago fully examined. Ms. McIlvain has already testified at length under oath in 2005, and the mythical hospital meeting has been completely disproved by both witnesses and medical records."

http://www.greenwichtime.com/sports/article/Armstrong-s-close-associate-set-to-appear-before-669017.php
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY