• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

U.S. Politics

Page 372 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
If there were still any doubts about whether or not Benghazi is just theater, this should put them to rest.

Issa's only goal is to keep the show going for as long as possible.

Erm, the conservative stalwart Maureen Dowd begs to differ;

The administration’s behavior before and during the attack in Benghazi, in which four Americans died, was unworthy of the greatest power on earth.

After his Libyan intervention, President Obama knew he was sending diplomats and their protectors into a country that was no longer a country, a land rife with fighters affiliated with Al Qaeda.

Yet in this hottest of hot spots, the State Department’s minimum security requirements were not met, requests for more security were rejected, and contingency plans were not drawn up, despite the portentous date of 9/11 and cascading warnings from the C.I.A., which had more personnel in Benghazi than State did and vetted the feckless Libyan Praetorian Guard. When the Pentagon called an elite Special Forces team three hours into the attack, it was training in Croatia — decidedly not a hot spot.

Hillary Clinton and Ambassador Chris Stevens were rushing to make the flimsy Benghazi post permanent as a sign of good faith with Libyans, even as it sat ringed by enemies.

The hierarchies at State and Defense had a plodding response, failing to make any superhuman effort as the siege waxed and waned over eight hours.

In an emotional Senate hearing on Wednesday, Stevens’s second-in-command, Gregory Hicks, who was frantically trying to help from 600 miles away in Tripoli, described how his pleas were denied by military brass, who said they could not scramble planes and who gave a “stand-down” order to four Special Forces officers in Tripoli who were eager to race to Benghazi.

“My reaction was that, O.K., we’re on our own,” Hicks said quietly. He said the commander of that Special Forces team told him, “This is the first time in my career that a diplomat has more” chutzpah “than someone in the military.”


The defense secretary at the time, Leon Panetta, insisted, “We quickly responded.” But they responded that they would not respond. As Emma Roller and David Weigel wrote in Slate: “The die was cast long before the attack, by the weak security at the consulate, and commanders may have decided to cut their losses rather than risking more casualties. And that isn’t a story anyone prefers to tell.”

Truth is the first casualty here when competing fiefs protect their mythologies. Some unhinged ideologues on the right cling to the mythology that Barry and Hillary are out to destroy America.

In the midst of a re-election campaign, Obama aides wanted to promote the mythology that the president who killed Osama was vanquishing terror. So they deemed it problematic to mention any possible Qaeda involvement in the Benghazi attack.

Looking ahead to 2016, Hillaryland needed to shore up the mythology that Clinton was a stellar secretary of state. Prepared talking points about the attack included mentions of Al Qaeda and Ansar al-Sharia, a Libyan militant group, but the State Department got those references struck. Foggy Bottom’s spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, a former Cheney aide, quashed a we-told-you-so paragraph written by the C.I.A. that said the spy agency had “produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to Al Qaeda in Benghazi and eastern Libya,” and had warned about five other attacks “against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British ambassador’s convoy.”

Nuland fretted about “my building leadership,” and with backing from Ben Rhodes, a top White House aide, lobbied to remove those reminders from the talking points because they “could be abused by members” of Congress “to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either?”

Hicks said that Beth Jones, an under secretary of state, bristled when he asked her why Susan Rice had stressed the protest over an anti-Muslim video rather than a premeditated attack — a Sunday show marathon that he said made his jaw drop. He believes he was demoted because he spoke up.

Hillary’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, also called Hicks to angrily ask why a State Department lawyer had not been allowed to monitor every meeting in Libya with Congressman Jason Chaffetz, who visited in October. (The lawyer did not have the proper security clearance for one meeting.) Chaffetz, a Republican from Utah, has been a rabid Hillary critic on Fox News since the attack. Hicks said he had never before been scolded for talking to a lawmaker.

All the factions wove their own mythologies at the expense of our deepest national mythology: that if there is anything, no matter how unlikely or difficult, that we can do to try to save the lives of Americans who have volunteered for dangerous assignments, we must do it.
Unless the truth would damage re-election chances. Then we must just make shyte up.... and feed it to the masses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/opinion/sunday/dowd-when-myths-collide-in-the-capital.html?_r=1&
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Erm, the conservative stalwart Maureen Dowd begs to differ;



Unless the truth would damage re-election chances. Then we must just make shyte up.... and feed it to the masses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/opinion/sunday/dowd-when-myths-collide-in-the-capital.html?_r=1&
Sure, Let's find answers to legitimate questions. But that ain't at all what Issa and the Rs are interested in. I was trying to think of a good way to put it and then saw this headline, which sums it up perfectly:

"Republicans seek blame on Benghazi rather than solutions"

Yep, exactly. They're not interested in finding solutions, never were. So the show must go on until they find something, anything that could be be pinned on Obama or Hillary. btw have you noticed the shift in focus after the election? Before the election it was all Benghazi and Obama, but then Obama won, and since the election it's mostly been Benghazi and Hillary. 2016 is not very far away.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
I was probably on some anti-tax crusade.

Where's your outrage now?
Wasn't outraged then and not outraged now. They usually turn out to be small stories that get big headlines.

But one might think the self-proclaimed anti-big-government right would have been just as outraged about the FBI spying on Greenpeace as they are about the IRS tagging TP'ers eh? Don't know if you've noticed, but the ACLU is.

Interesting little nugget about that FBI case btw - some of the documents that were collected by the FBI came from conservative organizations. Thought you guys didn't like Big Brother but you're helping him spy on your fellow citizens?

btw, Remember the outrage over IRS targeting of Emerge America which was seeking nonprofit status to train women Dem candidates? Remember the outrage over Bush-era IRS auditing of the NAACP? Remember the outrage over Bush-era IRS audits of Greenpeace? Remember the outrage over that liberal Episcopal church in Pasadena that said some critical anti-war things about Dubya before the 2004 election that resulted in a two-year IRS probe? Yeah, neither do I.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
Sure, Let's find answers to legitimate questions. But that ain't at all what Issa and the Rs are interested in. I was trying to think of a good way to put it and then saw this headline, which sums it up perfectly:

"Republicans seek blame on Benghazi rather than solutions"

Yep, exactly. They're not interested in finding solutions, never were. So the show must go on until they find something, anything that could be be pinned on Obama or Hillary. btw have you noticed the shift in focus after the election? Before the election it was all Benghazi and Obama, but then Obama won, and since the election it's mostly been Benghazi and Hillary. 2016 is not very far away.
Sure, Let's find answers to legitimate questions.
Oh, I see. So then it's not just theatre? BTW, questions never would have come up if not for that news channel who is the subject of all the left's vitriol.

Obama or Hillary
I'm thinking the Benghazi thing was a simple obfuscation of monumental incompetence.

Everybody knows Obama is incompetent. That Hillary is... well, that's a new development. Probably be best to know that before the 2016 election, wouldn't you say?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Oh, I see. So then it's not just theatre?
Absolutely there are legitimate questions to be asked but the Rs aren't interested in asking them because they know that the answers are technical and boring and not at all what they want to hear. Not nearly as sexy as an Obama/Hillary cover-up, eh?
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
Absolutely there are legitimate questions to be asked but the Rs aren't interested in asking them because they know that the answers are technical and boring and not at all what they want to hear. Not nearly as sexy as an Obama/Hillary cover-up, eh?
Probably not... although you should be ashamed using the word "sexy" and Hillary in the same sentence.

I'm curious tho Velo... why do you keep bringing Benghazi up? What are you worried about?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
I'm curious tho Velo... why do you keep bringing Benghazi up?
To demonstrate the incompetence of Congressional Rs and especially that of Darryl Issa. Thought that was kinda obvious. To be honest, though, I also find it amusing to watch Rs get so worked up about the "scandal!" du jour and then have it fizzle out while they desperately try to keep it going. I guarantee you that in a week or so Benghazi! will be today's Solyndra and Rs will be calling the IRS "scandal" worse than Watergate and Iran-Contra. Whatever happened to Solyndra anyway? Oh right.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/05/energy-department-loan-guarantee-charts/64932/

What are you worried about?
Not a thing, actually. Well, that's not true - one thing I am concerned about is Hillary being swift-boated a la John Kerry. Which is pretty much what Issa and the Rs are trying to do.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130511/us-benghazi-politics/?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=green

Steady drips of information about a horrific night in Libya are fueling Republican arguments and ads designed to fire up the conservative base and undercut the Democrats' early favorite for president in 2016.
Yep. Little surprise that Rand Paul - already running for 2016 - is claiming that Benghazi "precludes Hillary Clinton from ever holding office", eh?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
er, speaking of incompetence:

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wrote an angry letter to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew this morning.

"t is clear the IRS cannot operate with even a shred of the American people's confidence under the current leadership. Therefore, I strongly urge that you and President Obama demand the IRS Commissioner's resignation, effectively immediately. No government agency that has behaved in such a manner can possibly instill any faith and respect from the American public."
um, there is no IRS Commissioner. Hasn't been since November. One might think someone on the Rubio team would check such things - clearly they didn't even know that there isn't currently an IRS Commissioner. Bet it'll be a bit of a shock to Rubio when he discovers that the "scandal" occurred during Doug Shulman's term and that Shulman was a 2008 Bush appointee.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
To demonstrate the incompetence of Congressional Rs and especially that of Darryl Issa. Thought that was kinda obvious. To be honest, though, I also find it amusing to watch Rs get so worked up about the "scandal!" du jour and then have it fizzle out while they desperately try to keep it going. I guarantee you that in a week or so Benghazi! will be today's Solyndra and Rs will be calling the IRS "scandal" worse than Watergate and Iran-Contra. Whatever happened to Solyndra anyway? Oh right.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/05/energy-department-loan-guarantee-charts/64932/

Not a thing, actually. Well, that's not true - one thing I am concerned about is Hillary being swift-boated a la John Kerry. Which is pretty much what Issa and the Rs are trying to do.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20130511/us-benghazi-politics/?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=green

Yep. Little surprise that Rand Paul - already running for 2016 - is claiming that Benghazi "precludes Hillary Clinton from ever holding office", eh?
So Hillary bears no responsibility for what happened at Benghazi.


Whatever happened to Solyndra anyway?
Eh, nothing much. Half a billion tax dollars flushed down the toilet and Steve Spinner and George Kaiser still have big access to the President.

The press really didn't care. Kinda like Behghazi.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
er, speaking of incompetence:

um, there is no IRS Commissioner. Hasn't been since November. One might think someone on the Rubio team would check such things - clearly they didn't even know that there isn't currently an IRS Commissioner. Bet it'll be a bit of a shock to Rubio when he discovers that the "scandal" occurred during Doug Shulman's term and that Shulman was a 2008 Bush appointee.
Why the quotation marks? You don't think this is serious?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
So Hillary bears no responsibility for what happened at Benghazi.
Let's let the American people decide.

Forty-one percent of Republicans in the survey from Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm, said it was the biggest political scandal in American history, compared to only 23 percent of the general public. Nearly three-quarters of Republicans also said the scandal was bigger than the Watergate or Teapot Dome scandals. Seventy percent said it was worse the Iran-Contra.

Americans are more skeptical. Voters are more likely to trust former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton than the congressional GOP when it comes to Benghazi, 49 percent to 39 percent, Overall, Clinton has a 52 percent approval rating to congressional Republicans’ 36 percent.

Voters think Congress should be more focused on other major issues right now rather than Benghazi. By a 56/38 margin they say passing a comprehensive immigration reform bill is more important than continuing to focus on Benghazi, and by a 52/43 spread they think passing a bill requiring background checks for all gun sales should be a higher priority.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/gop-benghazi-anger-poll-91261.html#ixzz2TCATYym7
41% of Rs believe that it's the biggest scandal in American history. 75% believe that it's bigger than Watergate, 70% believe that it's bigger than Iran-Contra.

Oh but it gets better.

One interesting thing about the voters who think Benghazi is the biggest political scandal in American history is that 39% of them don't actually know where it is. 10% think it's in Egypt, 9% in Iran, 6% in Cuba, 5% in Syria, 4% in Iraq, and 1% each in North Korea and Liberia with 4% not willing to venture a guess.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/05/voters-trust-clinton-over-gop-on-benghazi.html
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Why the quotation marks? You don't think this is serious?
I think it's as serious as conservatives thought that the FBI targeting liberal groups during the Bush/Cheney years was serious.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
Let's let the American people decide.

41% of Rs believe that it's the biggest scandal in American history. 75% believe that it's bigger than Watergate, 70% believe that it's bigger than Iran-Contra.

Oh but it gets better.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/05/voters-trust-clinton-over-gop-on-benghazi.html
Polls. That's pretty typical. Do you look at polls to know what to wear day-to-day?

Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm
Whoa! Shocker...

Overall, Clinton has a 52 percent approval rating to congressional Republicans’ 36 percent.

That's definitive. Guess we can just wrap this all up.

On to the IRS story.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
I think it's as serious as conservatives thought that the FBI targeting liberal groups during the Bush/Cheney years was serious.
No difference in your view between the powers of the FBI compared to the IRS?

Moral Relativism is a really big deal to you, isn't it?

Let's try and discuss what's going on today.

Do you have a problem with the what the IRS has admitted to doing?


David Plouffe ‏@davidplouffe
What IRS did dumb and wrong. Impt to note GOP groups flourished last 2 elections, overwhelming Ds. And they will use this to raise more $.
Ron Fournier ‏@ron_fournier
.@davidplouffe serious questions: Why is that important to note? Is it justification for the action you called wrong? If not, why note?
https://twitter.com/davidplouffe


Justification? Sounds like what you are doing Velo.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
Polls. That's pretty typical.
True, I know the problems you guys have with polls.

That's definitive. Guess we can just wrap this all up.
Not yet.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/terrorism/299287-dems-press-gop-for-public-hearing-with-benghazi-report-authors

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the ranking member on the House Oversight Committee, is demanding that Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) allow the authors of an internal State Department review of Benghazi to testify at a public hearing instead of a private deposition. Cummings said the co-authors of last year's Accountability Review Board (ARB) report should have a chance to defend themselves in public from allegations they sought to shield top administration officials, including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, from criticism. “If our Committee is truly interested in improving the security of American diplomatic personnel overseas, Members of our Committee and the American public should hear first-hand from the individuals who have done the most exhaustive review of these attacks,” Cummings wrote in a letter to Issa.

Issa said Sunday on NBC's “Meet the Press” that he would seek sworn depositions from the two instead of having them testify publicly. “We don't want to have some sort of a stage show,” Issa said. “We'll go through — not in front of the public, but in a nonpartisan way — questions and answers, and then obviously a hearing to follow at an appropriate time.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/terrorism/299287-dems-press-gop-for-public-hearing-with-benghazi-report-authors#ixzz2TCPJ7dD4
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
Wonder why ol' Darryl won't allow them to testify publicly, eh?

On to the IRS story.
Yep, exactly.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/05/13/white-house-briefed-republicans-on-benghazi-talking-points-in-march/

ABC News reports that John Boehner’s staff was already briefed by the White House on the now-controversial Benghazi emails and talking points back in March, but judging by their lack of public statements about them, saw nothing amiss:
News of the Obama Administration’s role in the extensive editing of CIA talking points on Benghazi rocked the political world last week and prompted a demand from Speaker of the House John Boehner for the release of all related White House emails, but it should not have been a revelation to the Speaker.
The White House first briefed the House leadership on the talking point revisions on March 19. The briefing was given to the House Intelligence Committee, but the White House also invited Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to attend or to send a senior staff member. Boehner did not attend, but he did send staff, according to the Speaker’s office. Those attending the closed briefing were permitted to view the emails, but not to copy them.
The Speaker made no public reference to the emails — or the news of the State Department’s role in removing references to terror warnings in Benghazi — until the story became public last week.
If anything, that understates what may have happened. Asked for clarification of this briefing, a senior administration official emails me this:
On March 19, the General Counsel of the ODNI, Robert Litt, went up to the House to brief members and staff. All members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, staffers for the Committee, and Boehner and Pelosi were invited.
The senior administration official also says there was a separate briefing by Litt on the Senate side that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee were invited to.
There are a dozen House Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee and seven Republican Senators on the Senate Intelligence Committee. The White House claims they were all invited to briefings on the talking point revisions delivered by Robert Litt of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The White House didn’t say which Republicans attended and which didn’t. But obviously reporters might ask those dozen Republicans if they attended — or sent staff — and if so, why they didn’t sound the alarm about the revisions previously.
It also needs to be established a bit more clearly what, specifically, the Republicans were briefed on. If they were shown all of the dozen talking point revisions reported on by ABC News last week, as well as the controversial emails about them — which seems like it may be the case — and didn’t see them as problematic at the time, then the plot thickens.
********************************************
UPDATE II: A second White House official says that all of the dozen revisions of the talking points, and all the controversial email traffic reported on lately, was made available to both intelligence committees. This is something that could easily be checked with those GOP officials who attended these briefings.
They've known all about the "talking points" edits since March. Pure political theater.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
No difference in your view between the powers of the FBI compared to the IRS?
Yeah, I'd imagine the FBI has quite a bit more power.

Moral Relativism is a really big deal to you, isn't it?
Just responding to the IRS scandal the way you responded to the FBI scandal. Is that moral relativism?

Let's try and discuss what's going on today.

Do you have a problem with the what the IRS has admitted to doing?
Not really.

Roughly speaking, what seems to have happened is that three years ago the IRS was facing an explosion of newly formed 501(c)4 groups claiming tax exempt status, something that's legal only for groups that are primarily engaged in promoting education or social welfare, not electioneering. So some folks in the Cincinnati office tried to come up with a quick filter to flag groups that deserved extra scrutiny. But what should that flag be? Well, three years ago the explosion happened to be among tea party groups, so they began searching their database "for applications with 'Tea Party,' 'Patriots,' or '9/12' in the organization's name as well as other 'political sounding' names." This was dumb, and when senior leaders found out about it, they put a quick stop to it: On June 29, 2011, Lois G. Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt organizations, learned at a meeting that groups were being targeted, according to the [inspector general’s] report....Lerner instructed agents to change the criteria for flagging groups “immediately,” the report says.
Odd, I thought this one surely would be worse than Watergate or at least Iran-Contra but it's turning out to be little more than really bad judgement.

But it does highlight a real (and growing) problem, thanks largely to the cons on the SC who thought that Citizens United was a Really Good Idea: when does a 501(c)4 cross the line to political?
The problem is that the explosion of 501(c)4 groups is a genuine problem: they really have grown like kudzu, lots of them really are used primarily as electioneering vehicles, and the IRS has been either unwilling or unable to regulate them properly.
And that's a bipartisan problem.
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
VeloCity said:
True, I know the problems you guys have with polls.

Not yet.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/terrorism/299287-dems-press-gop-for-public-hearing-with-benghazi-report-authors

Wonder why ol' Darryl won't allow them to testify publicly, eh?

Yep, exactly.
True, I know the problems you guys have with polls.
You got me there. I'm not in politics so I'm not in the business of trying to figure out what people are thinking, manipulate the data, then disseminate said manipulations.

and then obviously a hearing to follow at an appropriate time.”
Hmmm. Did you mis-read. "then obviously a hearing at an appropriate time."

When Cummings runs the show he can... run the show. Fair enough?


So, do you have any problems with what the IRS has admitted to doing?
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Rs aren't interested in governing, just in being as obstructionist as possible. And then lying about it.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/gop-senator-calls-white-house-epa-pick-unresponsive-after-sh?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Gina McCarthy has answered more than written 600 written questions from Republican Sen. David Vitter since she was nominated by President Obama to head the EPA. Vitter’s office, however, has called her "unresponsive.”

Mirroring the playbook they used when Jack Lew was appointed to head the Treasury Dept., Republicans have bombarded McCarthy with more than 1,000 written questions (if you include the subparts) about her views.

Vitter, a Senator from Louisiana, has asked the vast majority of those questions. He’s asked her 411 written questions, with 242 subparts. She’s provided answers to them all, but on Monday, Vitter’s office said McCarthy had been “unresponsive” (and published all 123 pages of her answers to Vitter online.)
Then what do they do when it goes to committee? They boycott. Maybe one day we'll have a Republican Party run by adults again.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
You got me there. I'm not in politics so I'm not in the business of trying to figure out what people are thinking, manipulate the data, then disseminate said manipulations.
Unless it's a pro-Romney poll, then you buy it hook, line, and sinker.

Hmmm. Did you mis-read. "then obviously a hearing at an appropriate time."

When Cummings runs the show he can... run the show. Fair enough?
So it's Issa's show to run as he pleases? I see. Good to see that you are finally acknowledging that.

So, do you have any problems with what the IRS has admitted to doing?
I don't think this is going to be quite what you are hoping it is. Besides, shouldn't you be just as agitated about this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/13/ap-phone-records-government-intrusion-unprecedented_n_3268569.html

And yet...not a peep from the right. Perhaps because they approve of it - it's the liberal media, after all - and it's perfectly legal under the Patriot Act? Moral relativism indeed.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,638
0
0
And now it's just become farcical.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/issa-act-of-terror-is-different-than-terrorist?ref=fpb

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) on Monday disputed President Barack Obama's assertion that he attributed last year's deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya to terrorists, arguing that an "act of terror" is a different characterization than "a terrorist attack."
The show must go on.

Well, until the next show begins, anyway.

McConnell added that the IRS's conduct was just one example of the Obama administration's attempt to stifle its political enemies, naming other federal agencies who were also complicit in the effort.

“This is just getting started,” he told the National Review Online. “Finally, people get it. This is a lot bigger than just one person. This a whole effort by the administration, across the board, to squelch their opponents, to shut them up, and, finally, they’ve done it in a way that will allow us to call attention to it nationwide.”

“The whole effort by the administration to silence their enemies is going on across the board — at the FEC, the FCC, the SEC, and the HHS,” he added.
Well that explains why we haven't heard a word from Obama critics over the past 5 years. Not a word. Especially those Tea Partiers.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS