2020 Election results

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Darren
Posts: 1720
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:57 am

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Darren »

Scooter wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:16 pm
Appeals are allowed if they have any merit (which none of these cases has demonstrated thus far).

But judges don't write rulings with the intent of having them reversed, which is what your nonsensical "interpretation" would mean.
It's good to know judges have no leeway no matter what. I'll remember that ...
Thank you RBG wherever you are!

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 14646
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Scooter »

Yeah, no, not the slightest resemblance to what I said. Thanks for re-quoting to make that clear.
White privilege doesn't mean your life isn't hard. It means your skin colour isn't making it harder.

What goes on in a woman's uterus is none of your fucking business.

Equal rights for others does not mean less rights for you. It's not pie.

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 8444
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Econoline »

Darren, I'm not a lawyer at all, but even I understand that (1) an appeals court has to decide to hear a case; it's usually not automatic, and (2) in making that decision, (and in hearing the appeal, if they decide to do so) any higher court takes into consideration the evidence (or in this case, the lack of evidence) presented in the original case, and the reason(s) the original court made its decision.

(I apologize to all the lawyers here for not knowing the correct legal terminology for any of this.)
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 7176
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Sue U »

Darren wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:13 pm
Scooter wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 5:32 pm
Yeah, no, not how it works, but I understand that you need to hold onto the dream.
WOW! I didn't know appeals weren't allowed.
Scooter wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 6:16 pm
Appeals are allowed if they have any merit (which none of these cases has demonstrated thus far).

But judges don't write rulings with the intent of having them reversed, which is what your nonsensical "interpretation" would mean.
But don't you see, Scooter, this is all part of Donald Trump's cunning plan! First, plead the case so incompetently in the Complaint that you can't show the standing necessary to even get federal court jurisdiction, then make sure there is no coherent legal theory of liability even alleged -- and by all means, don't name as defendants the parties who might have actually caused the supposed harm -- and finally make sure there are no facts set out in the Complaint or in opposition to the Motion to Dismiss that might support either liability or the relief requested. Once you have the pleading set up just so and the Commonwealth defendants have fallen into your trap by filing for dismissal, be sure to substitute out attorneys three times, then show up in court for the hearing with Rudy Giuliani, who hasn't been in a federal courtroom since 1992 and is evidently unfamiliar with the applicable legal standards for decision, and have him spout batshit TV conspiracy theories that aren't even in the "case," such as it is. This way, rather than win and get the injunction you wanted to stop certification of the election results and throw out the entire Pennsylvania vote, you can lose and then pursue an appeal! And instead of filing an emergent appeal before the PA certification, wait until after it's done!

Assuming an appeal is ever actually filed in the Third Circuit, be sure your brief cites the Court's own recent precedent, as well as all the Supreme Court decisions, that clearly required the case to be thrown out. That way you're sure to lose again! And then! Yes!!! File a petition for cert in the Supreme Court, and hope that you can get four of the justices to actually vote to take it! Maybe it could happen before the term ends next June!!! But probably not.

This is a surefire plan that will hand Trump the election!
GAH!

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 7176
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Sue U »

Econoline wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 7:48 pm
Darren, I'm not a lawyer at all, but even I understand that (1) an appeals court has to decide to hear a case; it's usually not automatic, and (2) in making that decision, (and in hearing the appeal, if they decide to do so) any higher court takes into consideration the evidence (or in this case, the lack of evidence) presented in the original case, and the reason(s) the original court made its decision.

(I apologize to all the lawyers here for not knowing the correct legal terminology for any of this.)
Econo:

Any losing party can appeal to an intermediate appellate court (here, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals), which will review the trial court decision. Only petitions to the Supreme Court are discretionary with the court.

The "rule" is that appeals tare taken from orders, not opinions -- i.e., the appeal concerns the dismissal itself, not the dismissing court's opinion -- so the appellate court will review the dismissal "de novo," but will apply the same legal standard used in the trial court. (The appellate court will certainly look to the trial court's reasoning, but is not bound by it.) At no point will any "new" evidence be adduced or proffered on appeal, even in the highly unlikely event it does go to the Supreme Court. And virtually nothing in the transcript of the oral argument will be considered except to show that a particular argument may have been specifically waived or preserved by counsel for appeal.

The fantasy that J Brann somehow "helped" the Trump Campaign with his decision is completely delusional. Had he wished to do so, he probably would not have referred to the Campaign's supposed cause of action as a "Frankenstein's Monster" stitched together in a transparent effort to avoid the controlling law that necessarily torpedoes the case.
GAH!

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Of course some appeals are accepted and even granted on the grounds of incompetent representation first time around. Maybe that has been Trump and Giuliani's plan from the start. That could explain Giuliani's eye-popping $20,000 per day 'demand' (and the Four Seasons Landscaping thing) - if he is going to take an incompetence rap such that he could never practice law again (I'll vote for that) he needs to be adequately compensated. Well does anyone have a better explanation for the shirt show we have been treated to? (That 'shirt show' was of course a typo which I went to correct - but judging from his stirring exhibition on Borat II, it might be appropriate. I'll leave it.)

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 8444
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Econoline »

Thanks, Sue. I knew one of you guys would correct me, if necessary. I guess my point (1) was wrong (except for appeal to the SC) but point (2) was broadly correct, from a layman's point of view. Since an appeal will undoubtedly meet the same fate as the original case, the only point of an appeal is, apparently, to draw the whole thing out longer in an effort to get past the "safe harbor" deadline—in order to get state-appointed (rather than popularly-elected) Electors.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 8444
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Econoline »

Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8624
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Guinevere »

ex-khobar Andy wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 8:23 pm
Of course some appeals are accepted and even granted on the grounds of incompetent representation first time around. Maybe that has been Trump and Giuliani's plan from the start. That could explain Giuliani's eye-popping $20,000 per day 'demand' (and the Four Seasons Landscaping thing) - if he is going to take an incompetence rap such that he could never practice law again (I'll vote for that) he needs to be adequately compensated. Well does anyone have a better explanation for the shirt show we have been treated to? (That 'shirt show' was of course a typo which I went to correct - but judging from his stirring exhibition on Borat II, it might be appropriate. I'll leave it.)
Sorta, and in the context of habeas petitions, because there is a constitutional right of a defendant to counsel in criminal proceedings. Does not apply here - a party has no right to counsel in a civil proceeding, whether competent or not. And of course the plaintiffs here are the ones who chose Giuliani.
“Women belong in all places where decisions are being made.“ ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg

ex-khobar Andy
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 4:16 am
Location: Louisville KY as of July 2018

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by ex-khobar Andy »

Damn! For once I thought maybe I had found some logic - albeit convoluted - in something Trump and Giuliani had done.

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8624
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Guinevere »

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha....breath.... hahahahahahahahahahahaaahaa.
“Women belong in all places where decisions are being made.“ ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 6244
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Onalaska, Wi (suburb of La Crosse)

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Bicycle Bill »

First of all, please understand that not for one single nano-second am I even proposing that something like this happen....

But don't you begin to wish that there was some sort of one-off black ops apparatus in place — think of the old 1960s TV show "MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE", Mr. Phelps, and the Impossible Missions Force — that could ... err ... 'eliminate' the problem with Mr. Trump and a couple of other intransigent individuals?
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

Darren
Posts: 1720
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:57 am

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Darren »

Sue U wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 7:52 pm

But don't you see, Scooter, this is all part of Donald Trump's cunning plan! First, plead the case so incompetently in the Complaint that you can't show the standing necessary to even get federal court jurisdiction, then make sure there is no coherent legal theory of liability even alleged -- and by all means, don't name as defendants the parties who might have actually caused the supposed harm -- and finally make sure there are no facts set out in the Complaint or in opposition to the Motion to Dismiss that might support either liability or the relief requested. Once you have the pleading set up just so and the Commonwealth defendants have fallen into your trap by filing for dismissal, be sure to substitute out attorneys three times, then show up in court for the hearing with Rudy Giuliani, who hasn't been in a federal courtroom since 1992 and is evidently unfamiliar with the applicable legal standards for decision, and have him spout batshit TV conspiracy theories that aren't even in the "case," such as it is. This way, rather than win and get the injunction you wanted to stop certification of the election results and throw out the entire Pennsylvania vote, you can lose and then pursue an appeal! And instead of filing an emergent appeal before the PA certification, wait until after it's done!

Assuming an appeal is ever actually filed in the Third Circuit, be sure your brief cites the Court's own recent precedent, as well as all the Supreme Court decisions, that clearly required the case to be thrown out. That way you're sure to lose again! And then! Yes!!! File a petition for cert in the Supreme Court, and hope that you can get four of the justices to actually vote to take it! Maybe it could happen before the term ends next June!!! But probably not.

This is a surefire plan that will hand Trump the election!
Did the judge allow the evidence to be presented?
Thank you RBG wherever you are!

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 14646
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Scooter »

The question presupposes that the plaintiffs had anything that actually constituted evidence to present.
White privilege doesn't mean your life isn't hard. It means your skin colour isn't making it harder.

What goes on in a woman's uterus is none of your fucking business.

Equal rights for others does not mean less rights for you. It's not pie.

User avatar
Sue U
Posts: 7176
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:59 pm
Location: Eastern Megalopolis, North America (Midtown)

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Sue U »

Darren wrote:
Sun Nov 22, 2020 10:10 pm
Did the judge allow the evidence to be presented?
That's not how any of this works.

If you file in federal court, the Complaint must 1) show that the plaintiff has standing to bring the claim and 2) allege specific facts which, 2(a)) if true, would be sufficient to support defendant's liability under the cause of action pleaded and 2(b)) would be susceptible to remediation by the relief requested. This is the most basic rule of pleading and dismissal; it is so basic that virtually every federal practitioner has the "boiler-plate" standard at his/her fingertips. Here's the version I used most recently:
A. Applicable Legal Standards
1. Motion to Dismiss, Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)
On a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), “a court must ‘accept all allegations in the complaint as true and draw all inferences in the non-moving party’s favor.’” U.S. ex rel. Siegel v. Roche Diagnostics Corp., 988 F.Supp.2d 341, 343 (E.D.N.Y. 2013), quoting LaFaro v. New York Cardiothoracic Grp., PLLC, 570 F.3d 471, 475 (2d Cir. 2009); see also Allaire Corp. v. Okumus, 433 F.3d 248, 249-50 (2d Cir. 2006). To survive dismissal, a complaint must contain “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ ” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009), quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim is considered plausible on its face “when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678.

In deciding a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the court's consideration is limited to "(1) the factual allegations in the complaint, which are accepted as true; (2) documents attached to the complaint as an exhibit or incorporated ... by reference; (3) matters of which judicial notice may be taken; and (4) documents upon whose terms and effect the complaint relies heavily, i.e., documents that are 'integral' to the complaint." Calcutti v. SBU, Inc., 273 F.Supp.2d 488, 498 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (internal citation omitted); see also Messina v. Mazzeo, 854 F.Supp. 116, 128 (E.D.N.Y. 1994) (“The court's consideration on a motion to dismiss is limited to the factual allegations in the complaint; documents incorporated by reference into the complaint; matters of which judicial notice may be taken; and documents either in plaintiff's possession or of which plaintiff had knowledge and relied on in bringing suit.”). The court may dismiss a claim where it “appears beyond doubt” that the plaintiff can prove no facts that would entitle it to relief. Allen v. WestPointPepperell, Inc., 945 F.2d 40, 44 (2d Cir. 1991) (citation omitted). Although “the pleading standard is a liberal one, bald assertions and conclusions of law will not suffice.” Leeds v. Meltz, 85 F.3d 51, 53 (2d Cir.1996).

Moreover, although the court must accept the plaintiff’s allegations as true, it need not give any “credence to plaintiff’s conclusory allegations.” Cantor Fitzgerald Inc. v. Lutnick, 313 F.3d 704, 709 (2d Cir. 2002). As the Supreme Court has noted, “only a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss,” and whether a plausible claim for relief has been stated is a context-specific task that requires a court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 56 U.S. 662, 679 (2009). “But where the well-pleaded facts do not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has alleged – but it has not ‘show[n]’ – that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Id.

In this regard, the court’s analysis is limited to the plaintiff’s pleading, and documents attached to or incorporated by reference in the complaint are deemed part of the pleading. See Yak v. Bank Brussels Lambert, 252 F.3d 127, 130-31 (2d Cir. 2004); Cortec Indus., Inc. v. Sum Holding, L.P., 949 F.2d 42, 47-48 (2d Cir. 1991). When those documents contradict plaintiff’s allegations, the court should reject the incorrect allegations. See, e.g., Matusovsky v. Merrill Lynch, 186 F. Supp. 2d 397, 400 (S.D.N.Y. 2002) (granting motion to dismiss because plaintiff’s allegations were belied by the document to which complaint referred).
In the case before J Brann, the Complaint didn't allege a factual basis for either liability or relief, and the theory of liability claimed was Not A Thing. If you can't get past a Motion to Dismiss -- where the standard is extremely favorable to a plaintiff -- your case suuuuuuuxxxxxxxx.
GAH!

User avatar
Guinevere
Posts: 8624
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 3:01 pm

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Guinevere »

70F31B11-B2D7-493C-BC91-84158147D842.jpeg

Ahem.
“Women belong in all places where decisions are being made.“ ~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 14646
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Scooter »

White privilege doesn't mean your life isn't hard. It means your skin colour isn't making it harder.

What goes on in a woman's uterus is none of your fucking business.

Equal rights for others does not mean less rights for you. It's not pie.

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 31486
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Gob »

Trump refuses to accept that Joe Biden won the presidential election. Is there a constitutional path for him to stage a coup and stay in office for another term?


Not really. The electoral college meets on 14 December to cast its vote for president and nearly every state uses the statewide popular vote to allocate its electors. Biden is projected to win far more than the 270 electoral votes he needs to become president. His victory doesn’t hinge on one state and he has probably insurmountable leads in Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Arizona.

There is a long-shot legal theory, floated by Republicans before the election, that Republican-friendly legislatures in places such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania could ignore the popular vote in their states and appoint their own electors. Federal law allows legislatures to do this if states have “failed to make a choice” by the day the electoral college meets. But there is no evidence of systemic fraud of wrongdoing in any state and Biden’s commanding margins in these places make it clear that the states have in fact made a choice.

“If the country continues to follow the rule of law, I see no plausible constitutional path forward for Trump to remain as president barring new evidence of some massive failure of the election system in multiple states,” Richard Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, who specializes in elections, wrote in an email. “It would be a naked, antidemocratic power grab to try to use state legislatures to get around the voters’ choice and I don’t expect it to happen.”

For lawmakers in a single state to choose to override the clear will of its voters this way would be extraordinary and probably cause a huge outcry. For Trump to win the electoral college, several states would have to take this extraordinary step, a move that would cause extreme backlash and a real crisis of democracy throughout the country.

“There’s a strange fascination with various imagined dark scenarios, perhaps involving renegade state legislatures, but this is more dystopian fiction than anything likely to happen,” said Richard Pildes, a law professor at New York University. “The irony, or tragedy, is that we managed to conduct an extremely smooth election, with record turnout, under exceptionally difficult circumstances – and yet, a significant portion of the president’s supporters are now convinced that the process was flawed.”


more here...
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

Darren
Posts: 1720
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:57 am

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Darren »

The morning discussion on social media.

First person:

*******, this last election was much more in line with what you have advocated for years. Paper ballots. Hand counted paper ballots. Multiple days allowed to cast votes, not just one "election day". Multiple poll observers.

Despite tons of misinformation and attempted voter suppression, this last election was a success. Unfortunately the White House is spreading tons of misinformation because attempts to stop counting mail-in and absentee ballots legitimately cast in the approved time limit - including those from the military - didn't work.

Second person:

******* , actually you are not correct. Holding the ballots is an age old trick that BOTH parties have used for as long as I can remember.

Those of us who have been in politics for 40+ years have experienced most of these tactics ourselves and can recognize them.

Any politician telling you that this election was secure is outright lying to you because they know better.

This is the most rigged election I have ever witnessed in my lifetime.
I said this BEFORE the election. Allowing ballots to come in AFTER the election/or to be counted AFTER Election Day is a modern version of holding the ballots.

Lyndon Johnson was taken to court for holding the ballots in his 1960-1 US Senate race.
Those of you who have not been through campaigns and do not know the underbelly of the two political parties might be fooled into believing that the election wasn't rigged but those of us who know the inside story know that BOTH parties were rigging the election.
It needs to go to court to get the facts out to the public and get the corrupt elections in the USA rectified by adopting the methods used by countries who do have integrity in the vote.
They use hand counted paper ballots with observers in the polls.

Tulsi introduced legislation in to rectify the situation but the democratically controlled house refused to take it up!

First person:

******, I know you have seen rigged elections, but in this one, absentee ballots are allowed to come in if they are postmarked by election day. Ballots were not held up. Ballots were not cast after election night. There have been over 30 BS lawsuits, all laughable and thrown out. I have no idea where you are getting your info. In some states ballots were collected before the election but not allowed to be counted until election day. In other states, like California, we could drop them in ballot boxes and they were tracked and counted before election day. It goes by the law of the state.

Second person:

my former husband was a federal prosecutor when Democrat Governor //////// father went to prison in the 1970's for voter machine rigging.

During the 1970's the Republican ///////// County Clerk was alleged to have destroyed ballots from the heavily democratic precincts in the county by tossing them in the /////// River which was verified by friends who were there at the time.

It was quite a scandal.

I don't recall if she was indicted or not.

Destruction of ballots went on in Florida in Dem 2016 primary in Tim Conova's run against Debbie Wassermann Shultz. Tim teaches law in Florida. He took it to court and while getting ready for discovery and recounting the Clerk destroyed the ballots! I don't know what her punishment was for destroying evidence---probably depends on the political faction the judge is in.

In 1992 in the dem primary for governor I experienced several forms of ballot tampering in //.

I had ballots in /////// County held back and when the voters in that precinct demanded to know how many votes I had after the recount, the clerk contended 0 until the voters demanded a federal investigation because numerous people had voted for me.
Suddenly the ballots marked for me were found: I had won the precinct!!!

In ////////, the officials counting the votes taunted a woman supporter of mine in the area with "I marked more then a hundred ballots for //////. What do you think you can do about it?! Huh?!! What do you think you can do?!! "

Then he just laughed at her. She called in crying.

To allow the most political offices in the political system---your local county clerks and their employees to court the ballots is beyond naive. It is foolish!

The only way to prevent the history long fraud associated with mail in/absentee ballots is to have the ballots in BEFORE the day of the election then sent unopened to the precincts that the ballots are voting in to be opened, counted and reported the day of the election without ever leaving sight of the public.

I have been involved in election integrity issues in // since 1992---Nationally since 2000 when Republicans stole the election from Al Gore.

Al Gore should have sued to bring light on the corruption of the machine rigging and the antics of corruption that came to light in Bev Harris's documentary "Hacking Democracy".
I get my information from personal experience in election integrity issues and knowledge of rigging techniques used historically and presently.

I also watch progressives Tim Conova, Nikko House, Jimmy Dore, Convo Couch who cover election integrity issues.

I don't know what the 30 BS Lawsuits are that have been thrown out were.

I do know that one of the states had a law that required a certain deadline for ballots to be postmarked or returned but a court extended that because of Covid. The lawsuit on that was whether that was constitutional.

Nothing is BS concerning mail in ballots because it should never have been allowed in any other capacity than what I described earlier.

The lawsuits concerning the machines, I pray goes forward to completely rid the USA of the use of machines in any part of the election process.

Germany's equivalent of our Supreme Court struck down the use of machines in elections in 2009!!! because it was impossible to verify the outcome of elections when machines are used!

The USA knows all of this but REFUSES to make the necessary simple adjustments because they want to continue rigging the elections and controlling the masses.

The courts are just as politicized as the county clerks. There is no justice in the USA. The world knows of how corrupt our courts are---the main reason lawyers throughout the
world are insisting that Julian Assange not be extradited to the USA.

The very fact that the USA is ranked last in democracies throughout the world for integrity of our elections reveals that the entire world knows that USA elections are fraudulent.
The only people who don't know are the Americans who are not familiar with election integrity issues and addicted to a party label.😪

If you want more specifics, give me a call and I can discuss them with you.
Thank you RBG wherever you are!

Big RR
Posts: 11621
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: 2020 Election results

Post by Big RR »

:roll:

Post Reply