Bitcoin Forum
December 12, 2019, 02:11:35 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.19.0.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Vid of Biden admit bribe of Ukrainian Pres. to fire prosecutor investigating son  (Read 2393 times)
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 14, 2019, 11:43:28 AM
 #501

I am not confusing anything.

Then why did you give the definition for a judicial subpoena instead of a congressional subpoena? You didn't know what a house clerk was and were insisting that they somehow communicated with and stored records in a court, which they don't. You were confused, and then you were wrong.

In order for a subpoena to have legal force it must be filed with a court of record and made public, as well as personally served to the person required to comply with it. Without these steps it is just a request for information and not a subpoena.

Despite your personal preference of definition, a congressional subpoena is still a subpoena; its just not a judicial subpoena. It does not have to be filed with a court of record -- I'm not even certain it _has_ to be made public. This all stems from a misunderstanding on your part several pages back. Instead of admitting you were wrong, you doubled-down, tripled-down and now have quadrupled-down on your error. It doesn't change the fact that you were wrong to begin with.

Meanwhile, not one single person, Republican or otherwise, claims that the subpoenas don't exist -- you are alone in this camp.

Yes, one more thing.

When will you produce the subpoenas Nutilduhhh?

Again: they are not publicly available as of yet. That hasn't changed since 3 hours ago.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
1576159895
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576159895

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576159895
Reply with quote  #2

1576159895
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1576159895
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1576159895

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1576159895
Reply with quote  #2

1576159895
Report to moderator
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 888



View Profile
November 14, 2019, 01:09:42 PM
Merited by nutildah (2)
 #502

Looks like Congress is actually exempt from the FOIA.  They don't have to publish anything other than the daily Congressional Record, which is basically just a transcript of each session, and obviously bills, laws, amendments, and resolutions (these are required to be published on their website as of 2017).

Why FOIA Obligations Don't Apply to Congress

National Security Archive

The FOIA applies to Executive Branch departments, agencies, and offices; federal regulatory agencies; and federal corporations. Congress, the federal courts, and parts of the Executive Office of the President that function solely to advise and assist the President, are NOT subject to the FOIA.

I guess TECSHARE was assuming that because DOJ subpoenas are public record, Congressional Subpoenas must also be public record.  He actually had me kind of convinced that they were pubic record, you just had to ask for them.  At least we gained some useless knowledge.


nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 14, 2019, 01:24:16 PM
 #503

Looks like Congress is actually exempt from the FOIA.  They don't have to publish anything other than the daily Congressional Record, which is basically just a transcript of each session, and obviously bills, laws, amendments, and resolutions (these are required to be published on their website as of 2017).

Why FOIA Obligations Don't Apply to Congress

National Security Archive

The FOIA applies to Executive Branch departments, agencies, and offices; federal regulatory agencies; and federal corporations. Congress, the federal courts, and parts of the Executive Office of the President that function solely to advise and assist the President, are NOT subject to the FOIA.

I guess TECSHARE was assuming that because DOJ subpoenas are public record, Congressional Subpoenas must also be public record.  He actually had me kind of convinced that they were pubic record, you just had to ask for them.  At least we gained some useless knowledge.

Boom. Great find.

On the downside, I guess we'll never be able to prove that the subpoenas exist now.   Sad  Undecided  Cry

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2019, 02:07:18 AM
 #504

Boom. Great find.

On the downside, I guess we'll never be able to prove that the subpoenas exist now.   Sad  Undecided  Cry

BOOM great excuse to never have to prove your premise. All you have is a sad chain of topic sliding, logical fallacies, assumptions, and sophistry. You are the verbal equivalent of street performers juggling for nickles. All I am expecting you to do is prove your premise, that the supposed subpoenas issued by the house before October 31st exist by providing the document. This isn't that high of a standard of evidence.

You are the ones who brought up FOIA as a distraction and topic slide. FOIA has nothing to do with it. The subpoenas are public records. You can't find them, therefore you will manufacture any excuse you can think of to justify the fact that you can not prove your premise with a very basic standard of evidence, the document itself. You have fun with Mike Pompeo, FOIAs, and more Mike Pompeo.


I am not confusing anything.

Then why did you give the definition for a judicial subpoena instead of a congressional subpoena? You didn't know what a house clerk was and were insisting that they somehow communicated with and stored records in a court, which they don't. You were confused, and then you were wrong.

In order for a subpoena to have legal force it must be filed with a court of record and made public, as well as personally served to the person required to comply with it. Without these steps it is just a request for information and not a subpoena.

Despite your personal preference of definition, a congressional subpoena is still a subpoena; its just not a judicial subpoena. It does not have to be filed with a court of record -- I'm not even certain it _has_ to be made public. This all stems from a misunderstanding on your part several pages back. Instead of admitting you were wrong, you doubled-down, tripled-down and now have quadrupled-down on your error. It doesn't change the fact that you were wrong to begin with.

Meanwhile, not one single person, Republican or otherwise, claims that the subpoenas don't exist -- you are alone in this camp.

Yes, one more thing.

When will you produce the subpoenas Nutilduhhh?

Again: they are not publicly available as of yet. That hasn't changed since 3 hours ago.


ANY subpoena has basic legal requirements to be enforceable. This is not because of what jurisdiction they were issued from but because that is what due process requires. Part of that due process is a filing of the subpoena, certifying it, and serving it. That means as standard procedure public records are generated, ones which you should easily be able to produce, but can't.


Then why did you give the definition for a judicial subpoena instead of a congressional subpoena? You didn't know what a house clerk was and were insisting that they somehow communicated with and stored records in a court, which they don't. You were confused, and then you were wrong.

Quote
- prepare the roll of Members-elect.

- call the Members-elect to order at the commencement of each Congress; to call the roll of Members-elect, and, pending the election of the Speaker, to preserve order and decorum; and to decide all questions of order.

- prepare and distribute at the beginning of every session a list of reports required to be made to Congress.

- note all questions of order, and decisions thereon, and to print these as an appendix to the Journal of each session of the House.

- prepare and print the House Journal after each session of Congress, and to distribute the Journal to Members and to the executive and the legislature of each State.

- attest and affix the seal of the House to all writs, warrants, and subpoenas and formal documents issued by the House.

- certify the passage by the House of all bills and joint resolutions.

- receive messages from the President and the Senate when the House is not in session.

- prepare and deliver messages to the Senate and otherwise as requested by the House.

- retain, in the official library, a permanent set of the books and documents generated by the House.

- manage the office and supervise the staff of any vacant Member (the vacancy may have occurred by expulsion, resignation, or death) until a successor is elected.

In addition, the Clerk:

- acts as custodian of all noncurrent records of the House, pursuant to Rule VII.

- is responsible, under the supervision and direction of the U.S. House of Representatives Fine Arts Board, for the administration, maintenance, and display of the works of fine art and other similar property of the Congress for display or for other use in the House wing of the Capitol, the House Office Buildings, or any other location under the control of the House (P.L. 100-696). In addition, pursuant to the rules of the United States Preservation Commission, the Clerk may be asked to provide staff support and assistance to the Commission.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerk_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives#Duties



Meanwhile, not one single person, Republican or otherwise, claims that the subpoenas don't exist -- you are alone in this camp.

Quote
In letters to State Department employees, the Committees have ominously threatened- without any legal basis and before the Committees even issued a subpoena - that "[a]ny failure to appear" in response to a mere letter request for a deposition "shall constitute evidence of obstruction."

https://www.scribd.com/document/429357573/White-House-Letter-to-Speaker-Pelosi-Et-Al-10-08-2019


Starting to see a pattern...

yeah, me too:

"HUGE! EXCLUSIVE BOMBSHELL: Documents Released by Ukrainian General Prosecutor’s Office Reveal MILLIONS Funneled to Hunter Biden and the John Kerry Family"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/huge-exclusive-bombshell-documents-released-by-ukrainian-general-prosecutors-office-reveal-millions-funneled-to-hunter-biden-and-the-john-kerry-family/

https://www.scribd.com/user/259237201/JohnSolomon/uploads


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 888



View Profile
November 15, 2019, 02:27:32 AM
 #505

ANY subpoena has basic legal requirements to be enforceable. This is not because of what jurisdiction they were issued from but because that is what due process requires. Part of that due process is a filing of the subpoena, certifying it, and serving it. That means as standard procedure public records are generated, ones which you should easily be able to produce, but can't.

Just because a document has to be certified and served doesn't mean public records are generated.  There are plenty of scenarios where documents, like subpoenas for example, being made public would be a violation of privacy or interfere with an investigation.  Sometimes Subpoenas are made public, but not very often.  Go see how many subpoenas you find on the internet if you don't believe me.  

Then go see how many congressional subpoenas you can find.  The answer is not many.  That's because A) Congress is not required to make the subpoenas public and B) It's just a form.  If they want to make the substance of the subpoena public they would put the subpoena letter on the internet.

There are groups that are very against the exception Congress has when it comes to requiring records to be public, and the laws have been challenged, which is why in Jan 2017 The House voted to be even more explicit:

https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres5/BILLS-115hres5eh.pdf


Code:
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
January 3, 2017.
Resolved, That the Rules of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, including applicable provisions of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the House at the end of the One Hundred
Fourteenth Congress, are adopted as the Rules of the House
of Representatives of the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress,
with amendments to the standing rules as provided in section
2, and with other orders as provided in sections 3, 4, and 5.
SEC. 2. CHANGES TO THE STANDING RULES.


...

Code:
Records created, generated, or received by the
congressional office of a Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner in the performance of official duties
are exclusively the personal property of the individual
Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner and
10
•HRES 5 EH
such Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner has
control over such records.’

And let me stop you before you play the "that's for records, not for Subpoenas!"

Anything filed with the clerk is considered a record.

If you're going to continue to insist that all congressional subpoenas are public record, and if a subpoena isn't available to the public then it must not exist, I kindly request you let me know where all the other subpoenas are.

I've only been able to find 8 out of thousands.
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 15, 2019, 02:42:35 AM
 #506

Boom. Great find.

On the downside, I guess we'll never be able to prove that the subpoenas exist now.   Sad  Undecided  Cry

BOOM great excuse to never have to prove your premise.

I was being sarcastic, as anybody who is capable of thinking both logically and honestly can ascertain that the subpoena exists without having to see an actual copy of the subpoena. Unfortunately, you apparently don't fall into either of these categories. Not much I can do about that.

ANY subpoena has basic legal requirements to be enforceable. This is not because of what jurisdiction they were issued from but because that is what due process requires. Part of that due process is a filing of the subpoena, certifying it, and serving it. That means as standard procedure public records are generated, ones which you should easily be able to produce, but can't.

No, it doesn't mean that. This is your unfounded assertion. At least you abandoned your incorrect application of the term "court of record."

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2019, 03:52:30 AM
 #507

ANY subpoena has basic legal requirements to be enforceable. This is not because of what jurisdiction they were issued from but because that is what due process requires. Part of that due process is a filing of the subpoena, certifying it, and serving it. That means as standard procedure public records are generated, ones which you should easily be able to produce, but can't.

Just because a document has to be certified and served doesn't mean public records are generated.  There are plenty of scenarios where documents, like subpoenas for example, being made public would be a violation of privacy or interfere with an investigation.  Sometimes Subpoenas are made public, but not very often.  Go see how many subpoenas you find on the internet if you don't believe me.  

Then go see how many congressional subpoenas you can find.  The answer is not many.  That's because A) Congress is not required to make the subpoenas public and B) It's just a form.  If they want to make the substance of the subpoena public they would put the subpoena letter on the internet.

There are groups that are very against the exception Congress has when it comes to requiring records to be public, and the laws have been challenged, which is why in Jan 2017 The House voted to be even more explicit:

https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres5/BILLS-115hres5eh.pdf


Code:
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
January 3, 2017.
Resolved, That the Rules of the House of Representatives of the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, including applicable provisions of law or concurrent resolution that constituted rules of the House at the end of the One Hundred
Fourteenth Congress, are adopted as the Rules of the House
of Representatives of the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress,
with amendments to the standing rules as provided in section
2, and with other orders as provided in sections 3, 4, and 5.
SEC. 2. CHANGES TO THE STANDING RULES.


...

Code:
Records created, generated, or received by the
congressional office of a Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner in the performance of official duties
are exclusively the personal property of the individual
Member, Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner and
10
•HRES 5 EH
such Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner has
control over such records.’

And let me stop you before you play the "that's for records, not for Subpoenas!"

Anything filed with the clerk is considered a record.

If you're going to continue to insist that all congressional subpoenas are public record, and if a subpoena isn't available to the public then it must not exist, I kindly request you let me know where all the other subpoenas are.

I've only been able to find 8 out of thousands.

Your public record argument is unrelated and a non-sequitur. A subpoena is not just a record. This post is a record. A subpoena has actionable legal force. It is a matter of due process and constitutional law it has certain requirements based on that fact.

"The Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires that before any witness under congressional investigation can be punished for failure to cooperate, the pertinency of the interrogation to the topic under the congressional committee's inquiry must be brought home to the witness at the time the questions are presented.

The Justices have explained:
Unless the subject matter has been made to appear with undisputable clarity, it is the duty of the investigative body, upon objection of the witness on grounds of pertinency, to state for the record the subject under inquiry at that time and the manner in which the propounded questions are pertinent thereto.10 Even when a legislative committee acts within bounds, the form of questions asked and the rulings on objections to them maybe so obtuse as to make it violative of due process of law for courts to punish a refusal to answer."


http://www.ncsl.org/Portals/1/Documents/relacs/2018_PDS/Committee_Sub_Jones.pdf

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_17

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_45



No, it doesn't mean that. This is your unfounded assertion. At least you abandoned your incorrect application of the term "court of record."

Your argument is unless you accept the subpoenas are real without reading them you are not "capable of thinking both logically and honestly"?

It does mean that, as explained above. You can't enforce a subpoena without due process. If it is not enforceable, then it is not a subpoena.

Let me put it in simpler terms for you. You are driving down the highway and you get pulled over. The cop asks for your drivers license. You hand it to him and he says "hey this expired 3 months ago". He then tickets you for driving without a license. You have your license in your hand, but legally speaking you have a piece of plastic because it has no authority under the law.

A subpoena without authority under the law to punish is by definition not a subpoena (Latin for under penalty). Just like it is not a license because it has no legal standing, a subpoena is not a subpoena without its own basic constitutional due process requirements as outlined above.


Produce the subpoenas hyenas.




██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 888



View Profile
November 15, 2019, 04:03:46 AM
Last edit: November 15, 2019, 04:41:54 AM by TwitchySeal
 #508

Produce the subpoenas hyenas.
I can't find them.  I've only found 8 congressional subpoenas in total from the past 7 years.
 
Show me where there are hundreds of other congressional subpoenas (ballerinas  Wink).
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2019, 06:11:39 AM
 #509

I can't find them.  I've only found 8 congressional subpoenas in total from the past 7 years.
 
Show me where there are hundreds of other congressional subpoenas (ballerinas  Wink).

I don't remember saying there were hundreds of them. Is your point because there aren't a lot of them clearly some must be unpublished? That doesn't seem logical as it could simply be a matter of fact that they don't often exercise their subpoena authority, but you do seem to be a fan of assumptions.

P.S. Your rhymes suck Chuck.

Produce the subpoenas Tina.



██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 15, 2019, 06:59:58 AM
 #510

Your argument is unless you accept the subpoenas are real without reading them you are not "capable of thinking both logically and honestly"?

This really is a flat earther level argument. I don't have to see that the earth is round to know it is round. The preponderance of evidence suggests that, much like the subpoenas exist, the earth is round.

It does mean that, as explained above. You can't enforce a subpoena without due process. If it is not enforceable, then it is not a subpoena.

Sigh... No, it doesn't. Congress can request for judicial intervention in order to get somebody to comply with a congressional subpoena. So far, that has not happened yet with Giuliani or Pompeo. It has, however, happened in the past. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about yet you keep talking. Why?

Produce the subpoenas hyenas.

We've never tried to wriggle our way out of acknowledging that we can't produce them. However, only a fool would think they don't exist after the people being subpoenaed publicly acknowledged their existence. Do you really think Pompeo and Giuliani are trying to pull a fast one over on you? What's wrong with you?

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 15, 2019, 08:02:52 AM
 #511

Your argument is unless you accept the subpoenas are real without reading them you are not "capable of thinking both logically and honestly"?

This really is a flat earther level argument. I don't have to see that the earth is round to know it is round. The preponderance of evidence suggests that, much like the subpoenas exist, the earth is round.

It does mean that, as explained above. You can't enforce a subpoena without due process. If it is not enforceable, then it is not a subpoena.

Sigh... No, it doesn't. Congress can request for judicial intervention in order to get somebody to comply with a congressional subpoena. So far, that has not happened yet with Giuliani or Pompeo. It has, however, happened in the past. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about yet you keep talking. Why?

Produce the subpoenas hyenas.

We've never tried to wriggle our way out of acknowledging that we can't produce them. However, only a fool would think they don't exist after the people being subpoenaed publicly acknowledged their existence. Do you really think Pompeo and Giuliani are trying to pull a fast one over on you? What's wrong with you?

What evidence? You mean people talking about the subpoena? That is evidence? What else? In order to have a preponderance of evidence you must first have evidence, then multiple sources of it. You have neither. You have a preponderance of assumptions.

The judicial intervention you just described is what is required to meet the standards of due process and enforce a subpoena. If the subpoena has no legal standing, then it is not enforceable, and therefore by definition NOT A SUBPOENA. No penalty, no subpoena. Of course you can't even produce a document even resembling a subpoena from The House regarding impeachment before October 31st 2019.


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
BADecker
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2212
Merit: 1138


View Profile
November 15, 2019, 08:10:47 AM
 #512

Democrats have no actual plan for impeachment - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Evj_qduJY7U


Cool

Don't be afraid to donate Bitcoin >>> 1JDJotyxZLFF8akGCxHeqMkD4YrrTmEAwz !
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 15, 2019, 09:48:33 AM
 #513

more of the same

The only thing you've done in the last 20 pages of this thread is create an alternate reality for yourself where Pompeo and Giuliani never received subpoenas, and a congressional subpoena isn't a subpoena. Have fun living there by yourself, because not one other person on planet earth is stupid or bull-headed enough to live their with you.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 16, 2019, 01:26:06 AM
 #514

more of the same

The only thing you've done in the last 20 pages of this thread is create an alternate reality for yourself where Pompeo and Giuliani never received subpoenas, and a congressional subpoena isn't a subpoena. Have fun living there by yourself, because not one other person on planet earth is stupid or bull-headed enough to live their with you.

So what part of this absolves you of having to prove your premise that the subpoenas were real?


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 888



View Profile
November 16, 2019, 03:10:27 AM
 #515

more of the same

The only thing you've done in the last 20 pages of this thread is create an alternate reality for yourself where Pompeo and Giuliani never received subpoenas, and a congressional subpoena isn't a subpoena. Have fun living there by yourself, because not one other person on planet earth is stupid or bull-headed enough to live their with you.

So what part of this absolves you of having to prove your premise that the subpoenas were real?

Considering all available evidence, I think it's very reasonable to assume that the democrats filled out the official subpoena forms and included them with all of the subpoena letters they sent out in regards to the impeachment inquiry, even before October 31.

I understand that the only evidence that you are willing to consider is whether or not you are able to see a picture of the actual subpoena, and think it's reasonable to assume that the democrats didn't fill out the official subpoena forms and include them with the subpoena letters.

TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 16, 2019, 03:25:00 AM
 #516

Considering all available evidence, I think it's very reasonable to assume that the democrats filled out the official subpoena forms and included them with all of the subpoena letters they sent out in regards to the impeachment inquiry, even before October 31.

I understand that the only evidence that you are willing to consider is whether or not you are able to see a picture of the actual subpoena, and think it's reasonable to assume that the democrats didn't fill out the official subpoena forms and include them with the subpoena letters.

What is "all available evidence?" You mean some people talked about it? People talk about lots of things that don't exist, the Trump Ukraine quid pro quo for example. Your assumptions are not a standard of evidence, neither are the words of others.

It is very reasonable to assume you can not produce the subpoenas because they never existed. A filled out subpoena form is not a subpoena. An authorized, signed, and recorded subpoena complying with due process is a subpoena.


██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
nutildah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596
Merit: 2490


https://bitcoin.watfordfc.com


View Profile
November 16, 2019, 03:49:39 AM
 #517

It is very reasonable to assume you can not produce the subpoenas because they never existed. A filled out subpoena form is not a subpoena. An authorized, signed, and recorded subpoena complying with due process is a subpoena.

No, that's not reasonable given the fact that the people who received said subpoenas have acknowledged their existence. They aren't Democrats, they aren't liberal media, they aren't me or TwitchySeal. They are extremely loyal employees of the president. And here you are, fighting their words because they aren't in line with your incorrect belief that the subpoenas don't exist.

We already told you 20 times: we can't produce the subpoenas because they are not online.

https://www.justsecurity.org/67076/public-document-clearinghouse-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry/

There is a copy of the subpoena for DoD employee Laura Cooper, probably because she agreed to it and gave testimony already:

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.10.23.Cooper-subpoena.pdf

Jon Sale, counsel for Giuliani, knows this subject far better than you or any of us, and in his response to congress he acknowledges Giuliani's receipt of a subpoena:



He's not making half-assed arguments about "due process" or questioning the fact that the subpoena exists. And his word trumps yours on this issue every day of the week.

  ▄▄█████▄▄███████▄▄
███████████
     ▀▀███▄
█████████████        ▀██▄
█████████████          ██▄
███████████            ██▄
██▀▀█████▀▀              ██
██                       ██
██                       ██
▀██                     ██▀
▀██                   ██▀
 ▀██▄               ▄██▀
   ▀███▄▄       ▄▄███▀
      ▀▀█████████▀▀
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
████████████████████
██████████████████████
██████████████████
▀██████████████████████▀
▀██████████████████▀
▀██████████████▀
▀██████████▀
▀████▀
▀██▀
MAIN CLUB
PARTNER of
W A T F O R D  FC
Industry Leading Crypto Sportsbook
|
DAILY
PROMOS
& BOOSTS
|
PLAY
POKER
& CASINO
|
▄▄█████████▄▄
▄█████████████████▄
▄██████████▀▀▀▀███████▄
▄█████████▀     ████████▄
▄██████████   ████████████▄
█████████        ██████████
█████████▄▄   ▄▄███████████
███████████   █████████████
▀██████████   ████████████▀
▀█████████   ███████████▀
▀████████▄▄▄██████████▀
▀█████████████████▀
▀▀█████████▀▀
[/cent
TwitchySeal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 888



View Profile
November 16, 2019, 03:57:34 AM
 #518

Considering all available evidence, I think it's very reasonable to assume that the democrats filled out the official subpoena forms and included them with all of the subpoena letters they sent out in regards to the impeachment inquiry, even before October 31.

I understand that the only evidence that you are willing to consider is whether or not you are able to see a picture of the actual subpoena, and think it's reasonable to assume that the democrats didn't fill out the official subpoena forms and include them with the subpoena letters.
You mean some people talked about it? People talk about lots of things that don't exist, the Trump Ukraine quid pro quo for example. Your assumptions are not a standard of evidence, neither are the words of others.

Actually the words of others are absolutely a 'standard of evidence'.  In fact, believe it or not, subpoenas are often used to get people to say words that are then used to as evidence.  It's true that people talk about lots of things that don't exist, so you should consider the credibility of the person speaking as well as what they are saying.

If, for example, the Secretary of State says he received a subpoena, and he had no motive to lie about receiving that subpoena, then it should definitely be taken into consideration when considering whether or not the subpoena actually exists. 
BADecker
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 2212
Merit: 1138


View Profile
November 16, 2019, 09:16:58 PM
 #519



No wonder Pelosi is pushing to impeach Trump so hard. She or her son might be next.


Son of House Speaker Pelosi made money in Ukraine as well.



Son of House Speaker Pelosi made money in Ukraine as well. Hmmm. The left is scrubbing all videos to hide their tracks right now…


Son of House Speaker Pelosi made money in Ukraine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duiw4CdeVXI



Cool

Don't be afraid to donate Bitcoin >>> 1JDJotyxZLFF8akGCxHeqMkD4YrrTmEAwz !
TECSHARE
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3080
Merit: 1563


First Exclusion Ever


View Profile WWW
November 17, 2019, 04:10:41 AM
 #520

No, that's not reasonable given the fact that the people who received said subpoenas have acknowledged their existence. They aren't Democrats, they aren't liberal media, they aren't me or TwitchySeal. They are extremely loyal employees of the president. And here you are, fighting their words because they aren't in line with your incorrect belief that the subpoenas don't exist.

We already told you 20 times: we can't produce the subpoenas because they are not online.

https://www.justsecurity.org/67076/public-document-clearinghouse-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry/

There is a copy of the subpoena for DoD employee Laura Cooper, probably because she agreed to it and gave testimony already:

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.10.23.Cooper-subpoena.pdf

Jon Sale, counsel for Giuliani, knows this subject far better than you or any of us, and in his response to congress he acknowledges Giuliani's receipt of a subpoena:

https://i.imgur.com/DD4fN7I.png

He's not making half-assed arguments about "due process" or questioning the fact that the subpoena exists. And his word trumps yours on this issue every day of the week.

People make assumptions. People are mistaken. People lie. The fact that a small number, or a large number of people think or say something does not constitute evidence of anything other than thoughts and ideas. I am not fighting anything. I am calling out the fact that you have the burden of proof of proving these subpoenas even existed, and you can not meet this burden of proof. People talking and thinking things is not meeting your burden of proof.

Actually the words of others are absolutely a 'standard of evidence'.  In fact, believe it or not, subpoenas are often used to get people to say words that are then used to as evidence.  It's true that people talk about lots of things that don't exist, so you should consider the credibility of the person speaking as well as what they are saying.

If, for example, the Secretary of State says he received a subpoena, and he had no motive to lie about receiving that subpoena, then it should definitely be taken into consideration when considering whether or not the subpoena actually exists. 

Arbitrarily designating individuals to be approved sources of truth is not a logical argument, it is a logical fallacy. The fact is you cant produce the subpoenas.



██   ██   ██████████
 
  ██   █████████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
 ██   ██   █████████
 
   ██   ████████████
 
      ██   █████████
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Blockchain.com.do.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████
      ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▀ ▀ ▀▀█   █       █▄
 ▀ ▀▀▀█▄▄▀      ▄█ ▄▀█▄
   ▀ ▀█▄▄       ██ ▄▀██▀▄
  ▀ ▀▀█  ▀▄      ▀▄▄█▀   ▀▄
 ▀▀ ▀ █▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄
 ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄      █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█
 █▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
  ▀▄     ▄▄▄       █   █▀▀ ▀ ▀
    ▀▄ ▄█ ▄▄█▄      ▀▄▄█▀▀▀ ▀
      ▀██▄▄ ██       ▄▄█▀ ▀
        ▀▄▄▄▀      ▄▀  █▀▀ ▀
          ▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄█▄▄▄█ ▀ ▀▀
██████  ██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██
██████  ██
.Exchange Bitcoin Quickly.██  ██████
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
        ██
██  ██████




██████████   ██   ██
 
█████████████   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██   ██
 
████████████   ██
 
█████████   ██
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!