Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/18/2003 7:14:29 AM EDT
Court has ruled he cannot be held as "enemy combatant"!!

Breaking.....
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:15:34 AM EDT
Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:31:06 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:32:56 AM EDT
This is significant in [i]what[/i] way again?
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:35:26 AM EDT
This may be a good thing. Since so many will disagree with the decision, let us see the judge enforce it. What is the judge going to do? What if Bush ignores the judges decision stating, "One politically motivated judge is not going to jepordize the safety of the United States" The judiciary is out of control and without oversight. This may be the act that starts the wholesale curbing back of judicial powers.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:38:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raven: Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
View Quote
As a matter of fact, yes.... This is the first time I've seen a court UPHOLD our Constitution, in a LONG time!!!
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:41:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:43:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 7:44:03 AM EDT by Da_Bunny]
lib86 you are such a troll.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:49:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86:
Originally Posted By raven: Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
View Quote
As a matter of fact, yes.... This is the first time I've seen a court UPHOLD our Constitution, in a LONG time!!!
View Quote
While i have quite a bit of concern about the extent of the patriot act et al, I don't see Padilla being held as an enemy combatant as unconstitutional. The man fought against us and for our enemies. He is not entitled to traditional civil liberties because his was not a criminal act but a treasonous act. Regadless, the judiciary is the single biggest threat to the constitution. They can write laws and they can stike down laws and there is no oversight. You can only make a constitutional amendment to get a law passed in this country. To make everything a constitutional amendment would be the quickest way to destroy the constitution.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:51:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86:
Originally Posted By raven: Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
View Quote
As a matter of fact, yes.... This is the first time I've seen a court UPHOLD our Constitution, in a LONG time!!!
View Quote
So if it turns out that Saddam Hussein is a U.S. Citizen, you'll be for releasing him on the grounds of illegal search and siezure? You know, Lib, you're beginning to sound like the nutbags at DUh more and more often. That scares me. You're smarter than that...
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 7:58:28 AM EDT
What is wrong with you guys? An American citizen being held against his constitutionally guaranteed rights, and you are for it? Wrong is wrong. Next it will be your brother or sister or even yourself. Where does it end? If he really did what they say, charge him, try him, convict him and then execute sentence. But don't jerk the system around with someones life. I am beginning to think that a bunch of you only see one or two GOD given rights. And you have far to much trust in the gov.....
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:04:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Sylvan: The man fought against us and for our enemies. He is not entitled to traditional civil liberties because his was not a criminal act but a treasonous act
View Quote
Treason is a crime. "18 USC Sec. 2381. - Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States." It is also the only crime actually defined in the Constitution, along with the evidentiary predicate for conviction: Article, Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:06:12 AM EDT
3 judge panel of the second circuit. [url]http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/18/padilla.case/index.html[/url]
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:10:59 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Da_Bunny: lib86 you are such a troll.
View Quote
L86 has fought for his country. He has fought against abuse of authority. He deserves respect. Acting like a moron only makes you look silly.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:11:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Originally Posted By liberty86:
Originally Posted By raven: Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
View Quote
As a matter of fact, yes.... This is the first time I've seen a court UPHOLD our Constitution, in a LONG time!!!
View Quote
So if it turns out that Saddam Hussein is a U.S. Citizen, you'll be for releasing him on the grounds of illegal search and siezure? You know, Lib, you're beginning to sound like the nutbags at DUh more and more often. That scares me. You're smarter than that...
View Quote
You get more moronic, by the day, if it's possible... The Constitution has been upheld by the court, and YOU are displeased. Typical neo-con, throw out the Constitution, when it suits ya... "Those who would sacrifice a little Freedom, for a little safety, deserve neither one"... Ban Franklin. Sound like DU?? YOU are the one supporting international socialism, NOT I!!! [snoopy]
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:12:43 AM EDT
...AND, just because he can't be held as an "enemy combatant" does not mean he won't be held as an accused criminal. Think, people.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:13:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 8:14:30 AM EDT by imposter]
[url=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:81/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTIyMzVfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-2235_opn.pdf#xml=http://10.213.23.111:81/isysquery/irle17e/1/hilite]Opinion[/url] [url=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:81/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTIyMzVfZGlzLnBkZg==/03-2235_dis.pdf#xml=http://10.213.23.111:81/isysquery/irle17e/2/hilite]Dissent[/url]
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:15:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: You get more moronic, by the day, if it's possible...
View Quote
I MUST be on the right track, then...
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:15:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 8:17:25 AM EDT by raven]
hat is wrong with you guys? An American citizen being held against his constitutionally guaranteed rights, and you are for it? Wrong is wrong. Next it will be your brother or sister or even yourself. Where does it end? If he really did what they say, charge him, try him, convict him and then execute sentence. But don't jerk the system around with someones life. I am beginning to think that a bunch of you only see one or two GOD given rights. And you have far to much trust in the gov.....
View Quote
You seem to underestimate the vulnerability of our free and open country from terrorists like Padilla who exploit the civil rights extended to regular citizens who aren't actively acting and plotting to destroy the country. People like that dont deserve constitutional protection. They're footsoldiers of the enemy, like a spy caught behind enemy lines in civilian clothing. They're not simple street thugs. You seem to think they pose about as much risk. 9/11 should have instructed you that they are not. Maybe when a-bombs go off in the cities you'll start to understand the scope of the threat.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:17:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin: ...AND, just because he can't be held as an "enemy combatant" does not mean he won't be held as an accused criminal. Think, people.
View Quote
No, that will come next. "No evidence..." "Closet racism..." "Police state..." "Doesn't rise to the level..." "He didn't do anything..." "Where's Osama?" "Didn't read him his rights..." "He told Bush about 9/11 but Bush ignored him..." Hopefully God will smite this prick on the way out the door of the jail. Maybe get run over by a pig truck or somthing....
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:21:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By liberty86:
Originally Posted By raven: Wow, I bet you're overjoyed.
View Quote
As a matter of fact, yes.... This is the first time I've seen a court UPHOLD our Constitution, in a LONG time!!!
View Quote
While i have quite a bit of concern about the extent of the patriot act et al, I don't see Padilla being held as an enemy combatant as unconstitutional. The man fought against us and for our enemies.
View Quote
Fine, PROVE it, in a court of law!!
He is not entitled to traditional civil liberties because his was not a criminal act but a treasonous act.
View Quote
I see... so the President of the US, using Dictatorial powers, can strip a US citizen of his citizenship, declare him to be the enemy, and hold him indefinetly with no recourse??? Didn't we just kill a bunch of Iraqis, and American soldiers, to REMOVE a dictator in the mid-east?? TREASON, btw, IS tried in the COURTS!!! (ANOTHER govt school graduate!! [rolleyes])
Regadless, the judiciary is the single biggest threat to the constitution.
View Quote
Actually, I think people like you are a FAR greater danger...
They can write laws and they can stike down laws and there is no oversight. You can only make a constitutional amendment to get a law passed in this country. To make everything a constitutional amendment would be the quickest way to destroy the constitution.
View Quote
Go look in the mirror, to see the destroyer of our nation.....[pissed] You will blindly follow a dictator...straight to hell. [devil]
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:23:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 8:37:19 AM EDT by imposter]
From the opinion:
In sum, we hold that (1) Donna Newman, Esq., may pursue habeas relief on behalf of Jose Padilla; (2) Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is a proper respondent to the habeas petition and the District Court had personal jurisdiction over him; (3) in the domestic context, the President’s inherent constitutional powers do not extend to the detention as an enemy combatant of an American citizen seized within the country away from a zone of combat; [red](4) the Non-Detention Act prohibits the detention of American citizens without express congressional authorization; and (5) neither the Joint Resolution nor 10 U.S.C. § 956(5) constitutes such authorization[/red] under section 4001(a). These conclusions are compelled by the constitutional and statutory provisions we have discussed above. The offenses Padilla is alleged to have committed are heinous crimes severely punishable under the criminal laws. Further, under those laws the Executive has the power to protect national security and the classified information upon which it depends. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. app. § 3. And [red]if the President believes this authority to be insufficient, he can ask Congress—which has shown its responsiveness—to authorize additional powers.[/red] To reiterate, we remand to the District Court with instructions to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the Secretary of Defense to release Padilla from military custody within 30 days. [red]The government can transfer Padilla to appropriate civilian authorities who can bring criminal charges against him. Also, if appropriate, Padilla can be held as a material witness in connection with grand jury proceedings.[/red] In any case, Padilla will be entitled to the constitutional protections extended to other citizens.
View Quote
How can anyone complain? All this opinion seems to says is that Bush needs to get Congressional authorization to hold US Citizens arrested on US soil without trial. The Constitution gave this power to Congress (Art. I, § 9), not the President. And even if GWB does not have the nads for that, he can still hold the guy in a regular court proceeding.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:23:02 AM EDT
so what, he may not be held as an enemy combatant, he will be tried and convicted, as well as being hopefully executed
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:27:11 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raven: People like that dont deserve constitutional protection. They're footsoldiers of the enemy,
View Quote
So are those American Patriots who wish to see our Republic restored, and know it will NOT happen politically..... People like YOU, will cheer, when they come for people like ME!!
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:40:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raven:
hat is wrong with you guys? An American citizen being held against his constitutionally guaranteed rights, and you are for it? Wrong is wrong. Next it will be your brother or sister or even yourself. Where does it end? If he really did what they say, charge him, try him, convict him and then execute sentence. But don't jerk the system around with someones life. I am beginning to think that a bunch of you only see one or two GOD given rights. And you have far to much trust in the gov.....
View Quote
You seem to underestimate the vulnerability of our free and open country from terrorists like Padilla who exploit the civil rights extended to regular citizens who aren't actively acting and plotting to destroy the country. People like that dont deserve constitutional protection. They're footsoldiers of the enemy, like a spy caught behind enemy lines in civilian clothing. They're not simple street thugs. You seem to think they pose about as much risk. 9/11 should have instructed you that they are not. Maybe when a-bombs go off in the cities you'll start to understand the scope of the threat.
View Quote
Raven, please tell me you don't really believe this....... I refuse to sacrifice liberty for security. As a free society, we have always be vulnerable to these kind of actions. But, I fear the gov even more than terrorists right now. I would rather face unknown possible terrorism than possible terrorism and a run away out of control government. The government should be of the people, by the people, not against the people. dave Live free or die. Give me liberty or give me death.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:42:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86:
Originally Posted By raven: People like that dont deserve constitutional protection. They're footsoldiers of the enemy,
View Quote
So are those American Patriots who wish to see our Republic restored, and know it will NOT happen politically..... People like YOU, will cheer, when they come for people like ME!!
View Quote
Strange how you're paranoid about protecting this nebulous "Patriot" movement to refer to in the future tense, but are sanguine about the rights of Islamic nutcases who have a proven track record of hostility and willingness to kill innocent civilians, and are still at work today.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 8:48:19 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thedave1164:
Originally Posted By raven:
hat is wrong with you guys? An American citizen being held against his constitutionally guaranteed rights, and you are for it? Wrong is wrong. Next it will be your brother or sister or even yourself. Where does it end? If he really did what they say, charge him, try him, convict him and then execute sentence. But don't jerk the system around with someones life. I am beginning to think that a bunch of you only see one or two GOD given rights. And you have far to much trust in the gov.....
View Quote
You seem to underestimate the vulnerability of our free and open country from terrorists like Padilla who exploit the civil rights extended to regular citizens who aren't actively acting and plotting to destroy the country. People like that dont deserve constitutional protection. They're footsoldiers of the enemy, like a spy caught behind enemy lines in civilian clothing. They're not simple street thugs. You seem to think they pose about as much risk. 9/11 should have instructed you that they are not. Maybe when a-bombs go off in the cities you'll start to understand the scope of the threat.
View Quote
Raven, please tell me you don't really believe this....... I refuse to sacrifice liberty for security. As a free society, we have always be vulnerable to these kind of actions. But, I fear the gov even more than terrorists right now.
View Quote
Really? The government's ramming jets into American buildings? Plotting to set off radiological bombs in cities? Funny, I'm a little more worried about the terrorists who HAVE DONE THAT, and are actively planning future attacks as I type this. Not exactly worried about the government doing its duty to make it as hard as possible on terrorists. Your Patrick Henry rhetoric is a little hollow seeing those buildings collapse on 9/11. I never want to see that bullshit happen ever again, and if it makes life hard on the assholes who have devoted their lives to killing Americans at home and at work, I am ok with that.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 9:04:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By raven: Your Patrick Henry rhetoric is a little hollow seeing those buildings collapse on 9/11. I never want to see that bullshit happen ever again, and if it makes life hard on the assholes who have devoted their lives to killing Americans at home and at work, I am ok with that.
View Quote
Patrick Henry lived to see more than 3000 killed in the pursuit of this freedom you so easily squander for a false sense of security. I pity you up there in Alaska, shivering from fear, not the cold. The fear that some terrorist may do something bad. The terrorist's have already won, if everyone believes as you. And Patrick Henry and his fellow freedom fighters lost a 200+ year fight, because their sons and daughters really didn't believe in freedom. dave BTW I don't really think you are scared, but that is the way you are responding to this.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 9:10:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 9:11:39 AM EDT by Scottman]
I don't have all the details, but I'm glad they found in favor of his citizenship and constitutional rights. How long before the government comes to YOUR house and says "Gee...all those guns...alll that ammo... you simply MUST be a terrorist." Boom. You go away. No contact, no counsel, no nothing. That's what you guys are cheering for if you thing Padilla should have lost this case. And that's why there won't be any restoration of this republic. It will crumble under the weight of the hypocrisy of its citizens. Nobody's ever gonna get up and do anything. Padilla's a terrorist, Koresh was a nutjob, Weaver a "militia man." They'll trump something up on you and spin it however they need to and you'll disapear like you want Padilla to, and all your "brothers" will cheer. Clowns. Scott
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:03:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:11:25 AM EDT
Just as someone may be held without bail based on certain charges, someone who is part of a trans-national terrorist organization is not your common criminal. Putting padillo in general population does put us at what can be construed as an unreasonable risk. Funny how no one gave a fuck as thousands of japanese were interned by good democrats earl warren and FDR, but one man who it appears was trying to kill us opens up the flood of tears and concern.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:15:13 AM EDT
Hey Hun, whats with the "sucicide pact" talk? Starting to sound like a liberal talking about the 2nd... No one here has said that he should go free. Not a one. Some of us believe that if you are an American citizen, you are afforded some rights. Put him on trial for treason, I have no problem with that. My issue lies with capturing an American citizen and not giving him any rights afforded under the Constitution. This due to the fact he can conviently be labeled an "enemy combatant" by King George. And yes, I'll risk going a little bit easy on a SUSPECTED criminal as opposed to treading on sacred Constitutional principals.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:18:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Sylvan: Just as someone may be held without bail based on certain charges, someone who is part of a trans-national terrorist organization is not your common criminal. Putting padillo in general population does put us at what can be construed as an unreasonable risk.
View Quote
I don't believe that anyone is suggesting he recieve bail. I have no issue with him being held w/o bail, just treat him like any other American citizen that has been arrested and poses a high flight risk.
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:20:58 AM EDT
I hope this persuades Bush and the INS from giving amnesty to all the illegals we have.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:08:56 AM EDT
Originally Posted By leelaw: I hope this persuades Bush and the INS from giving amnesty to all the illegals we have.
View Quote
They'll get amnesty alright... That deal was made before 9/11. They'll be voting, by next election.. [:D]
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:37:46 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/19/2003 6:39:49 AM EDT by Nimrod1193]
I actually agree with the court's ruling in the Padilla case. The court did not say that the Bush administration had to release Padilla, they said that he had to be released unless he was charged with a crime. It would have been different if Padilla was not a U.S. citizen, or if he were detained on foreign soil, but this was a U.S. citizen arrested in the U.S, so he is entitled to the full protection of the Constitution. If anyone here thinks that the government should be allowed to detain U.S. citizens in this country indefinitely with no opportunity for judicial review, I have just three words for you... [img]http://www.hillary.org/hillary/hill.announce.podium.side.jpg[/img] [b]President Hillary Clinton[/b] [red]Edited for spelling[/red]
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:47:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By sloth:
Originally Posted By Sylvan: Just as someone may be held without bail based on certain charges, someone who is part of a trans-national terrorist organization is not your common criminal. Putting padillo in general population does put us at what can be construed as an unreasonable risk.
View Quote
I don't believe that anyone is suggesting he recieve bail. I have no issue with him being held w/o bail, just treat him like any other American citizen that has been arrested and poses a high flight risk.
View Quote
i was referring to general prison population. But, here is a theory, quite possible that you can only prove membership in a terrorist organization. All it takes is one judge to let him free to do what he wants. I trust the military more than I trust judges.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:50:41 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:51:10 AM EDT
[b] Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[/b] Damn, I hate the way the "Bill of Rights" gets in the way of a good lynching. [rolleyes] [devil]
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:53:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 6:59:34 AM EDT
Tagged to read more later, but must say I wholeheartedly agree with Liberty and thedave. John
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 7:01:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By wetidlerjr: [b] Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[/b] Damn, I hate the way the "Bill of Rights" gets in the way of a good lynching. [rolleyes] [devil]
View Quote
The consitution is only valid if there is a judiciary that honors it. You want to put this guy in the hands of the same system that set OJ free. I trust the administration and the military more than I do the judicial system. Reality sucks, doesn't it.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 8:48:21 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EricTheHun: We need not 'go easy' on anyone. I think this case will be appealed and won by the President, er, King George, as you and others call him...on [red]sacred[/red] Constitutional principals! Eric The(Reasonable)Hun[>]:)]
View Quote
You mean the same court that upheld "Silviera", nullifying the 2nd Amendment in the ninth circuit??? [:P] Or maybe the one that upheld campaign finance??[:P] How 'bout the fag decision??[:P] Ten Commandments??[:P] Roe???[:P] Yes Eric, THAT court prolly WILL uphold your little socialist president!!! [devil] Actually eric, when it comes to the tweedely-dees, you are looking like a pitiful caricature of yourself... Sell-out. There is NO Constitution any more.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 8:54:14 AM EDT
Liberty, If you were wrongly arrested for a crime, what would you trust more, a military court or a civilian court? Now, If you were arrested for a crime you did commit, ask yourself the same question. The judiciary is the failure here. If you want to know why the constitution died, it is the courts.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 8:56:40 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:01:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: Yes Eric, THAT court prolly WILL uphold your [red]little socialist president[/red]!!! [devil] [red]There is NO Constitution any more.[/red]
View Quote
Honest question, Liberty. If the items above are your honest beliefs, why aren't you out doing something about it?
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:14:31 AM EDT
Citizens should be afforded every right guaranteed by our Constitution. The Bill of Rights was expressly added to forclose the .gov's ability to unilaterally abrogate those rights, even and especially for REALLY BAD CHARACTERS DOING REALLY BAD THINGS.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:21:52 AM EDT
This POS trained in the Al-Qaeda camps. He's brainwashed...let them release him, lets see how far he will go before something unnatural happens to him. Where ever he shows his face, someone should punch through it! Lets break out the ol'Brooklyn ball bats and start from the knees on up....[}:D]
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:25:09 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:33:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Originally Posted By liberty86: Yes Eric, THAT court prolly WILL uphold your [red]little socialist president[/red]!!! [devil] [red]There is NO Constitution any more.[/red]
View Quote
Honest question, Liberty. If the items above are your honest beliefs, why aren't you out doing something about it?
View Quote
Question for you; How do you know I'm not doing something?? Another; Do you really believe I'm gonna announce it on the internet, if I wax some judge in Denver??? [:P] Or maybe a US Attorney, and make it look like an internet sex ring??? [snoopy]!! Or how 'bout the Seattle US attorney, and member of Washington Ceasefire, an anti-gun group?? Now deceased btw...[^] Pay attention. It began several years ago.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 9:46:36 AM EDT
Originally Posted By liberty86: You will blindly follow a dictator...straight to hell. [devil]
View Quote
Are you calling our President a dictator?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top