logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Sarah Palin Ethics Probe Complete, Abuse of Power?
DaytonRocker
post Oct 11 2008, 01:49 AM
Post #1


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,520
Member No.: 547
Joined: February-26-03

From: Dayton, Ohio
Gender: Male
Politics: Moderate
Party affiliation: Republican



The big news tonight is that an ethics probe found Sarah Palin abused her power by dismissing the state's public safety commissioner. While finding she did not illegally fire Walt Monegan, the probe found that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.11O(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.:

QUOTE
The legislature reaffirms that each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

Questions for debate?

1. Should Sarah Palin face legal consequences as a result of her actions?

2. Will this have any effect on the presidential race?


This post has been edited by DaytonRocker: Oct 11 2008, 01:51 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4  
Start new topic
Replies (60 - 75)
nebraska29
post Oct 31 2008, 12:14 PM
Post #61


*********
Only siths speak in absolutes.

Sponsor
November 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,712
Member No.: 1,871
Joined: November-29-03

From: York, Nebraska
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE
Outside the “law” – Oh you mean the “ethical” law – not the real law in the real world where if you threaten someone or taser a minor there are legal consequences – which if you are a Trooper would be loss of job, gun and badge.

Ya you bet I would question his boss if he was threatening my family – count on it.




A good number of complaints against Trooper Wooten had no foundation in fact. The drinking and tasering matter already had "consequences" and were appropriately dealt with.

-The Palins accused Wooten of picking up his child at an elementary school. The problem?, HE HAD PERMISSION. Can't punish for that; 0 'fer 1

-A picture was provided of Troper Wooten with a shot moose out of season. Monagen informed Palin that her father would have to be prosecuted as well as he was at the scene!, MATTER DROPPED! It's not about the law when a family member is involved right Ted? laugh.gif Read pages 23 & 24 on that. 0 'fer 2

-Trooper Wooten was accused of improperly taking disability pay and wa photographed riding a snowmobile. The problem?, the doctor said he could! Read page 29. 0 'fer 3 Ted

-There were consequences for the drinking and tasering issue. That's on page 30. Palin couldn't understand that privacy was of prime importance in such a case and that talking about it openly outside of the investigation unit was improper and could jeopardize the case. That is on page 30. The matter was properly handled and dealt with. She had no business sticking her nose in the matter, her husband, less so. Does your boss's wife ask you work related questions? By becoming personally involved, the Palins could've jeopardized future investigations and consequences had their involvement come to light. Not a responsible way to govern over internal matters. That is erratic and irresponsible executive leadership.0 'fer 4!

As for the threats-could you specifically quote the section where that was proven to be true by the committee? hmmm.gif

So far, the accusation is unsubstantiated.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Oct 31 2008, 12:27 PM
Post #62


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
nebraska
A good number of complaints against Trooper Wooten had no foundation in fact. The drinking and tasering matter already had "consequences" and were appropriately dealt with.


You mean the 4 day suspension?

If it was me, and he threatened my family – as he did, I would have demanded he be fired.

“UPDATE: McCain-Palin spox Taylor Griffin writes: "The investigation set out to determine whether Gov. Palin had acted properly in reassigning Walt Monegan, it concluded that she absolutely did. The Legislative Council’s investigation offers an opinion based on a very tortured reading of the Ethics Act, but, as Legislative Council Chairman Kim Elton pointed out yesterday, it has no force in law.
"Unable to find wrongdoing under the original investigation, Mr. Branchflower tried to stretch the Ethics Act to fit facts that are well beyond the scope of the law. To say she is in violation because she did not stop Todd Palin from raising concerns with appropriate authorities about a rogue State Trooper who had threatened their family and abused the public trust really defies commonsense and has no basis in the law. Besides, as Todd pointed out in his interrogatory responses, she did ask him to 'drop it.'

"Also, the Council made clear that the vote to make the report public was not an endorsement of its findings. In fact, five members of the council spoke up to say they do not agree with the report’s findings. The lengths that were taken to stretch the scope of the investigation to find something damaging to say, when the facts bore out that the Governor acted appropriately, show that our concerns about the politicization of this investigation were entirely justified.

"Trooper Wooten has a history of violent and intimidating behavior and threatened the life of Sarah Palin’s father. As anyone would, the Palins raised these serious concerns to the proper authorities. As Todd Palin said in his interrogatory responses, 'I make no apologies for wanting to protect my family and wanting to publicize the injustice of a violent trooper keeping his badge and abusing the workers’ compensation system.'"
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...-makes-tro.html

“Wooten has a history of reprimands as a trooper, along with a series of personal indiscretions as well. Perhaps the most heinous of these is the one Wooten has admitted to: electrocuting his 11-year-old step son with a taser, allegedly to teach him a lesson. He's also been accused of drinking on the job”


http://usconservatives.about.com/b/2008/09...mike-wooten.htm

This post has been edited by Ted: Oct 31 2008, 12:35 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nebraska29
post Nov 1 2008, 07:22 PM
Post #63


*********
Only siths speak in absolutes.

Sponsor
November 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,712
Member No.: 1,871
Joined: November-29-03

From: York, Nebraska
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Ted @ Oct 31 2008, 07:27 AM) *
QUOTE
nebraska
A good number of complaints against Trooper Wooten had no foundation in fact. The drinking and tasering matter already had "consequences" and were appropriately dealt with.


You mean the 4 day suspension?

If it was me, and he threatened my family – as he did, I would have demanded he be fired.

“UPDATE: McCain-Palin spox Taylor Griffin writes: "The investigation set out to determine whether Gov. Palin had acted properly in reassigning Walt Monegan, it concluded that she absolutely did. The Legislative Council’s investigation offers an opinion based on a very tortured reading of the Ethics Act, but, as Legislative Council Chairman Kim Elton pointed out yesterday, it has no force in law.
"Unable to find wrongdoing under the original investigation, Mr. Branchflower tried to stretch the Ethics Act to fit facts that are well beyond the scope of the law. To say she is in violation because she did not stop Todd Palin from raising concerns with appropriate authorities about a rogue State Trooper who had threatened their family and abused the public trust really defies commonsense and has no basis in the law. Besides, as Todd pointed out in his interrogatory responses, she did ask him to 'drop it.'

"Also, the Council made clear that the vote to make the report public was not an endorsement of its findings. In fact, five members of the council spoke up to say they do not agree with the report’s findings. The lengths that were taken to stretch the scope of the investigation to find something damaging to say, when the facts bore out that the Governor acted appropriately, show that our concerns about the politicization of this investigation were entirely justified.

"Trooper Wooten has a history of violent and intimidating behavior and threatened the life of Sarah Palin’s father. As anyone would, the Palins raised these serious concerns to the proper authorities. As Todd Palin said in his interrogatory responses, 'I make no apologies for wanting to protect my family and wanting to publicize the injustice of a violent trooper keeping his badge and abusing the workers’ compensation system.'"
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...-makes-tro.html

“Wooten has a history of reprimands as a trooper, along with a series of personal indiscretions as well. Perhaps the most heinous of these is the one Wooten has admitted to: electrocuting his 11-year-old step son with a taser, allegedly to teach him a lesson. He's also been accused of drinking on the job”


http://usconservatives.about.com/b/2008/09...mike-wooten.htm


The fact of the matter Ted, is that state employee reprimands and the like are private in nature. Whatever Wooten has done, he has paid the price for those actions. It's also a fact that a good number of accusations were not true. Do you have anything to say about the car ride to the elementary school or moose issue? Remember, the latter didn't take off as Palin's dad was there as well. Not only that, but sharing a permit, as Wooten did, was somewhat allowable if you read the report.

Your source about the "stretch" interpretation is a real riot. You quoted a statement from a McCain-Palin spokesman. What else is that person going to say? rolleyes.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

You also have yet to produce one credible fact as to how specifically the investigative committee was out to get Palin. A republican dominated committee just had it out for her..........I would spend more time on outside sources, as opposed to campaign hacks whose job it is to spew forth whatever it is they are paid to put out there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CruisingRam
post Nov 1 2008, 08:15 PM
Post #64


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Member No.: 927
Joined: July-25-03

From: Hawaii
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



QUOTE(nebraska29 @ Nov 1 2008, 11:22 AM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ Oct 31 2008, 07:27 AM) *
QUOTE
nebraska
A good number of complaints against Trooper Wooten had no foundation in fact. The drinking and tasering matter already had "consequences" and were appropriately dealt with.


You mean the 4 day suspension?

If it was me, and he threatened my family – as he did, I would have demanded he be fired.

"UPDATE: McCain-Palin spox Taylor Griffin writes: "The investigation set out to determine whether Gov. Palin had acted properly in reassigning Walt Monegan, it concluded that she absolutely did. The Legislative Council's investigation offers an opinion based on a very tortured reading of the Ethics Act, but, as Legislative Council Chairman Kim Elton pointed out yesterday, it has no force in law.
"Unable to find wrongdoing under the original investigation, Mr. Branchflower tried to stretch the Ethics Act to fit facts that are well beyond the scope of the law. To say she is in violation because she did not stop Todd Palin from raising concerns with appropriate authorities about a rogue State Trooper who had threatened their family and abused the public trust really defies commonsense and has no basis in the law. Besides, as Todd pointed out in his interrogatory responses, she did ask him to 'drop it.'

"Also, the Council made clear that the vote to make the report public was not an endorsement of its findings. In fact, five members of the council spoke up to say they do not agree with the report's findings. The lengths that were taken to stretch the scope of the investigation to find something damaging to say, when the facts bore out that the Governor acted appropriately, show that our concerns about the politicization of this investigation were entirely justified.

"Trooper Wooten has a history of violent and intimidating behavior and threatened the life of Sarah Palin's father. As anyone would, the Palins raised these serious concerns to the proper authorities. As Todd Palin said in his interrogatory responses, 'I make no apologies for wanting to protect my family and wanting to publicize the injustice of a violent trooper keeping his badge and abusing the workers' compensation system.'"
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...-makes-tro.html

"Wooten has a history of reprimands as a trooper, along with a series of personal indiscretions as well. Perhaps the most heinous of these is the one Wooten has admitted to: electrocuting his 11-year-old step son with a taser, allegedly to teach him a lesson. He's also been accused of drinking on the job"


http://usconservatives.about.com/b/2008/09...mike-wooten.htm


The fact of the matter Ted, is that state employee reprimands and the like are private in nature. Whatever Wooten has done, he has paid the price for those actions. It's also a fact that a good number of accusations were not true. Do you have anything to say about the car ride to the elementary school or moose issue? Remember, the latter didn't take off as Palin's dad was there as well. Not only that, but sharing a permit, as Wooten did, was somewhat allowable if you read the report.

Your source about the "stretch" interpretation is a real riot. You quoted a statement from a McCain-Palin spokesman. What else is that person going to say? rolleyes.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

You also have yet to produce one credible fact as to how specifically the investigative committee was out to get Palin. A republican dominated committee just had it out for her..........I would spend more time on outside sources, as opposed to campaign hacks whose job it is to spew forth whatever it is they are paid to put out there.




Killing a moose "by proxy" is perfectly legal. I have done it many times for my Ma and Pa. That is for background on the moose-killing issue.

I must also point out, that fish and game issues are taken much more seriously in Alaska than in the "lower48". You better have a GPS on you when you go hunting- if you are even 100 yards into the wrong management division, it can literaly mean jail time.

Again, Nebraska, what is really unethica and immoral behind Palin's behavior is that she was instructing and pressuring Monegan, directly or by proxy, to break the law himself.

Monega is now a more popular and sympathetic figure in Alaska than Palin, BTW. He gets the "thumbs up" celebrity treatment wherever he goes. He is highly respected and known to be completely incorruptable.

I am hoping he runs against Palin in the next election. w00t.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 3 2008, 01:47 AM
Post #65


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
The fact of the matter Ted, is that state employee reprimands and the like are private in nature. Whatever Wooten has done, he has paid the price for those actions
.

Ya Riiiiight nebraska that 5 day suspension really hurt him The fact is he did one hell of a lot more than Palin.

And 5 member of the ‘council” thought the report findings was crap – I agree. You can agree with anyone you like sir.

In here position I would have done more to get the trooper fired – a lot more.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CruisingRam
post Nov 3 2008, 03:29 AM
Post #66


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Member No.: 927
Joined: July-25-03

From: Hawaii
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



QUOTE(Ted @ Oct 30 2008, 02:10 PM) *
QUOTE
What you don't seem to get ted, is that she is being hoisted upon her own Petard- she misused her office to fulfill a personal vendetta against a state employee- that is just plain wrong, no matter how you parse it.


No – all she might have done is suggest that a guy who is obviously a dirt bag be looked at – then later when she moved a man it was assumed (with not a shred of proof) that the Trooper issue was part of the reason for it.

I would have done the same. If the trooper was in my chain of command and he did what he clearly has I would have done more than Palin. You CR?


So you would break the law, for your personal vendetta, no matter what the law said or circumstances- and you would fire anyone that wouldn't break the law for you?

Sounds very nixon to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 3 2008, 11:29 PM
Post #67


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(CruisingRam @ Nov 2 2008, 10:29 PM) *
QUOTE(Ted @ Oct 30 2008, 02:10 PM) *
QUOTE
What you don't seem to get ted, is that she is being hoisted upon her own Petard- she misused her office to fulfill a personal vendetta against a state employee- that is just plain wrong, no matter how you parse it.


No – all she might have done is suggest that a guy who is obviously a dirt bag be looked at – then later when she moved a man it was assumed (with not a shred of proof) that the Trooper issue was part of the reason for it.

I would have done the same. If the trooper was in my chain of command and he did what he clearly has I would have done more than Palin. You CR?


So you would break the law, for your personal vendetta, no matter what the law said or circumstances- and you would fire anyone that wouldn't break the law for you?

Sounds very nixon to me.



As has been said here you have to torture the “ethics” issue here to get to that conclusion.

For me it would be safety of people and family. And for me if the man threatened my father I would be in his face the same day – with his boss right there.

Clearly Palin did not do that. And clearly, as I have posted, 5 people on the Committee thought the “ethics” violation conclusion, as minor as it is was, is not a valid conclusion based on the events.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CruisingRam
post Nov 4 2008, 01:07 AM
Post #68


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Member No.: 927
Joined: July-25-03

From: Hawaii
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



So, you think it is okay to circumvent the law for personal reasons, and order your chief of police to act outside the law-yes or no ted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 4 2008, 01:47 AM
Post #69


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(CruisingRam @ Nov 3 2008, 08:07 PM) *
So, you think it is okay to circumvent the law for personal reasons, and order your chief of police to act outside the law-yes or no ted.

It’s a moot point sir since the folks whose job it is to judge Palin just came in with the verdict.

ALASKA PERSONNEL BOARD SAYS GOV. SARAH PALIN DID NOT VIOLATE ETHICS LAW IN DISMISSING STATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONER
http://www.newsmeat.com/news/meat.php?arti...m&buid=3281
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CruisingRam
post Nov 4 2008, 01:59 AM
Post #70


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Member No.: 927
Joined: July-25-03

From: Hawaii
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



Okay, one case dismissed, one confirmed, we have gone over that already Ted, she was found to have violated the statute, provided several times now.

And again, you avoid the question- you say it is okay to use your office to persue a personal vendetta and fire an officer (which would be against the law, had Monegan actually crumbled under the pressure) that has already been disciplined, according to law and statute.

Walt Monegan was clearly being pressured to do something outside the law- by firing that trooper- do you understand that Ted?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 4 2008, 02:06 AM
Post #71


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(CruisingRam @ Nov 3 2008, 08:59 PM) *
Okay, one case dismissed, one confirmed, we have gone over that already Ted, she was found to have violated the statute, provided several times now.

And again, you avoid the question- you say it is okay to use your office to persue a personal vendetta and fire an officer (which would be against the law, had Monegan actually crumbled under the pressure) that has already been disciplined, according to law and statute.

Walt Monegan was clearly being pressured to do something outside the law- by firing that trooper- do you understand that Ted?



My understanding of the Personnel Board decision that just came out is she is not guilty of the charge the legislature laid on her.

And it’s not a “vendetta” sir to question a officer of the law who is doing illegal things. Just because he was threatening her family does not change that does it. Look up vendetta CR
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CruisingRam
post Nov 4 2008, 02:19 AM
Post #72


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 7,934
Member No.: 927
Joined: July-25-03

From: Hawaii
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Other



You have to be a complete moron to buy what the personell board is selling- we are talking about a hand picked board by Palin, every single person on that board can be fired by Palin, and all of them owe thier allegience to Palin- it is completely a Palin dog an pony show. Everyone on that board is completely dependent on Palin staying in office, there is no way it can even be remotely considered to be "independent".

Listen, when you come to office, and go so far as to use cabinet members to harrass Monegan, you have to be completely blind to see something there is unethical.

Bottom line is- Wooten had already been disciplined for the only allegations proven to have any base (the threats turned out to be baseless) - and Monegan would have had to break the law to take it any further than that.

The legislative body, made up of 8 republican and 4 dems, was more than fair, almost too easy on her. And independent.

Same can't be said of the personel review board- Palin cronies and insiders- all of them.

So, Ted, again, you sidestep the question- you think it is okay for an elected official to pressure a law enforcement officer to act outside the law?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 4 2008, 02:27 AM
Post #73


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



You have to be a complete moron to buy what the personell board is selling-

No you have to be a moron to go for the witch hunt that was so biased that 5 members came out publically to say just that.

Yes CR she got a hearing by the right people – finally and they cleared her of this crap. get over it - and vote for Obama
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
La Herring Rouge
post Nov 4 2008, 02:29 AM
Post #74


******
Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 367
Member No.: 1,955
Joined: December-7-03

From: West Hartford, CT
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Independent



Ted, it is illegal to share the officer's personal file with Todd Palin, which was done. It is also illegal to censure of dismiss a person for something they did not do. If you have a problem with Alaska's policies that is one thing, but the state KNEW exactly what Wooten did and punished him for it (appropriately in their minds). Perhaps, and I know this is a tough one to wrap the ole noggin around, but perhaps some of peoples' opinions about Wooten are based on Palin's allegations and NOT on the facts found by Monegan and his department.
You aren't just going after some democrats on that committee here ted, you are blaming the entire State Police Department for their policies.

I mean really, you parade around Palin's popularity in that state as if it was your own badge. Why, if they had any good evidence, would her own people refuse to get rid of the guy? They did what they could according to statute and moved on. Palin didn't.
The fact that so many of her charges were proven to be stretched or outright fabrications is evidence that she was not impartial on this issue.

And finally, how many times are you going to post "proof" that she was acquitted by showing us that she was proven to be within her rights to fire Monegan? Are you going to keep ignoring the other charge?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nebraska29
post Nov 4 2008, 06:18 AM
Post #75


*********
Only siths speak in absolutes.

Sponsor
November 2005

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 2,712
Member No.: 1,871
Joined: November-29-03

From: York, Nebraska
Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE
It’s a moot point sir since the folks whose job it is to judge Palin just came in with the verdict.

ALASKA PERSONNEL BOARD SAYS GOV. SARAH PALIN DID NOT VIOLATE ETHICS LAW IN DISMISSING STATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONER
http://www.newsmeat.com/news/meat.php?arti...m&buid=3281


There were FOUR points of contention Ted, not one. She was absolved on one, and found guilty of another. The fourth point found that the attorney general was less than forth coming about the facts. Do you not agree that there was more than one point of contention here?

QUOTE
My understanding of the Personnel Board decision that just came out is she is not guilty of the charge the legislature laid on her.

And it’s not a “vendetta” sir to question a officer of the law who is doing illegal things. Just because he was threatening her family does not change that does it. Look up vendetta CR


Once again, there were four findings, not one. Why you choose to ignore the other three is beyond me.

Could you substantiate these threat allegations from a source? Are they mentioned in the report? Where is the proof Ted? And no, paid spokespeople don't count. laugh.gif

Also, what evidence can you provide that the investigative committee that was dominated by republicans, was out to get her? Have you found out any information tha you could provide for us? hmmm.gif

This post has been edited by nebraska29: Nov 4 2008, 06:19 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ted
post Nov 4 2008, 02:14 PM
Post #76


***********
Ten Thousand Club

Sponsor
February 2007

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 11,415
Member No.: 1,807
Joined: November-20-03

From: Mass.
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE
Also, what evidence can you provide that the investigative committee that was dominated by republicans, was out to get her? Have you found out any information tha you could provide for us?


As I posted above 5 members of the committee felt so badly about the cooked up “ethics” violation that they came out publically to denounce it. Enough said.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  « < 2 3 4
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: February 21st, 2018 - 09:36 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.