HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why two Articles are a br...

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:05 AM

Why two Articles are a brilliant idea!

Last edited Tue Dec 10, 2019, 11:36 PM - Edit history (1)

Both require a minimal number of witnesses. Abuse of power will only require examples. Whereas, obstruction of Congress will require a debate about the Constitution and how much power should be in the hands of Congress and how much power should be in the hands of the Executive. It is a debate that can only help our country in the long run, in my opinion.

For example, obstruction of Justice would require witnesses and the House does not wish for the Senate to be a circus, just a representative body for the American people. Much of it can be umbrellaed under abuse of power.

61 replies, 5959 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 61 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why two Articles are a brilliant idea! (Original post)
kentuck Dec 2019 OP
H2O Man Dec 2019 #1
Iliyah Dec 2019 #2
Catherine Vincent Dec 2019 #49
H2O Man Dec 2019 #52
Catherine Vincent Dec 2019 #57
Towlie Dec 2019 #53
H2O Man Dec 2019 #56
MartyTheGreek Dec 2019 #58
H2O Man Dec 2019 #60
mopinko Dec 2019 #3
barbtries Dec 2019 #4
SterlingPound Dec 2019 #26
spanone Dec 2019 #5
NurseJackie Dec 2019 #6
Hoyt Dec 2019 #7
Dopers_Greed Dec 2019 #8
fescuerescue Dec 2019 #10
fescuerescue Dec 2019 #9
Amishman Dec 2019 #11
dajoki Dec 2019 #12
panader0 Dec 2019 #13
Whiskeytide Dec 2019 #14
IronLionZion Dec 2019 #15
EndlessWire Dec 2019 #50
kentuck Dec 2019 #16
backscatter712 Dec 2019 #18
backscatter712 Dec 2019 #17
kentuck Dec 2019 #19
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #30
kentuck Dec 2019 #39
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #41
kentuck Dec 2019 #45
Grasswire2 Dec 2019 #51
backscatter712 Dec 2019 #54
BannonsLiver Dec 2019 #20
Cha Dec 2019 #59
calimary Dec 2019 #21
Laura PourMeADrink Dec 2019 #22
BannonsLiver Dec 2019 #25
Laura PourMeADrink Dec 2019 #36
BannonsLiver Dec 2019 #44
Laura PourMeADrink Dec 2019 #46
BannonsLiver Dec 2019 #47
mountain grammy Dec 2019 #61
a kennedy Dec 2019 #23
MartyTheGreek Dec 2019 #24
uponit7771 Dec 2019 #27
kentuck Dec 2019 #29
uponit7771 Dec 2019 #31
kentuck Dec 2019 #34
uponit7771 Dec 2019 #48
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #35
kentuck Dec 2019 #40
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #43
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #28
kentuck Dec 2019 #32
uponit7771 Dec 2019 #33
StarfishSaver Dec 2019 #38
guillaumeb Dec 2019 #37
bucolic_frolic Dec 2019 #42
AncientGeezer Dec 2019 #55

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:08 AM

1. Recommended.

While I would have preferred four, I have 100% confidence in the House leadership's insights and abilities. I am very happy today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:15 AM

2. Agreed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 06:47 PM

49. I preferred 4 or more as well

Didn't Clinton get 4?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Catherine Vincent (Reply #49)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 08:00 PM

52. The House committee

put up four for the vote, and two were rejected by the full House. Thus, two went to the Senate for trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #52)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 01:06 AM

57. Thank you for the refresher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 08:25 PM

53. It was a terrible decision!

Democrats are in effect conceding that all of the other accusations they've made against Trump are false and these two articles are all they have. That's what Trump is claiming now and that claim sounds frighteningly compelling. Once the Republicans dispose of those two accusations Democrats will have nothing.

No, this is the only chance they'll get and they need to put everything they have into it. Every impeachable transgression that Trump has committed must be included in those articles of impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Towlie (Reply #53)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 11:51 PM

56. Respectfully disagree.

I should start by noting my older son and I debate this no less than four times per week. He agrees with your opinion. (I should also note that, as a result of Irish heredity an environmental influences from growing up within my family of origin, I debated my doctor today, saying the Democrats needed to include everything. Arguing for little to no reason was a sign of affection growing up.)

It is, of course, the only chance we will get in Trump's first term. I'm not sure if this has been reported in the news yet, but there are those in the Democratic Party's leadership who have considered the possibility of four related events in 2020: first, if Trump is found not guilty by the Senate early in the year, second, he is somehow re-elected, and third, the Democrats re-take the Senate, and lastly, the federal courts continue to hold that people like McGahn have to testify, we may see Impeachment #2 in a theater near us in 2021.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #56)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 08:43 AM

58. I concur... This is an opening to a longer play-out...

I think more charges are going to come out or leak out that will only paint a picture in more vivid detail. The public needs to see that in-mass and now over time that Trump is not good for our country. Trump will have an albatross of impeachment over his throne in the run up to 2020. And, an impeachment by a Democratic congress that dutifully conducted the impeachment charges to uphold it's constitutional duties. In doing so, Democrats retain the legal and moral grounds for upholding democracy. I see it at a strategic political slow bleed until then.

H2O Man, Did you ever box Jimmy Scanlon from Pittsburgh back in the 60's?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MartyTheGreek (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 10:37 AM

60. Interesting .....

I didn't box Jimmy Scanlon. But you've caught my interest with that name. I'm wondering if he is the grandson of a Pittsburgh fighter with the same name, who fought between 1906 and 1922? In that era, my great uncle (same name as me) fought around the northeast, including in Pittsburgh. Also, he trained and managed Bucky Lawless -- after beating Bucky in an upstate NY fight -- and that included Bucky's fights in Pittsburgh. Bucky fought against 14 world champions of various weight classes in his career.

Records from that era are frequently incomplete. I'm sure that this Jimmy Scanlon had a lot more fights than was recorded, as did so many fighters up until the 1930s. Even the great Carmen Basilio had 5 or 6 fights that I can document that aren't on his "official" record -- promoted by my great uncle. For that matter, five of the great Rocky Marciano's fights aren't on his official record .....they were his loses, that his manage removed!

Do you know the Jimmy Scanlon from the 1960s?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:15 AM

3. they can give evidence of abuse of power from now till 11/20 if they want.

smart.
tho it is a damn sad day in american where they have to strategize around lying "leaders", corrupt media, disinfo, trolls and idiot america.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:20 AM

4. i had to read your post

because i really wanted them to throw the book at him. the weight of the evidence of all that he has done, all the impeachable acts he has committed, i thought would go a ways toward turning some people toward the truth of the matter.

I'm not convinced you're right. But the die is cast so I hope you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to barbtries (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:07 PM

26. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:22 AM

5. How will the senate republicans try to claim trump didn't Obstruct Congress?

they will lie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:25 AM

6. I was hoping that violation of the Impoundment Control Act would be a specific article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 10:29 AM

7. As the legal experts on MSNBC are saying -- "Abuse of Power" can be anything including Obstruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 11:48 AM

8. I want the book thrown at the motherfucker, but agreed

They need to only pursue what they can absolutely nail him for.

If he's found "not guilty" on even one count, he'll scream "TOTAL EXONERATION".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dopers_Greed (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:03 PM

10. yep. I can see that

They will use the extra charge as extra "evidence" that he has been totally exonerated.

Trump will be proclaiming "double exonerated!"

(Sadly, we already know what the verdict will be)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:01 PM

9. We'll soon see

But don't be surprised if the Senate's version of debate is different than yours.

In fact, I'm not even sure if debate is required. It may simply be presented and then voted on. They did this with AOC's new green dream bill for instance and effectively killed it.

For sure the Senate side will add an extra week on impeachment in the news. But I'm not sure that the second charge will add more than a few hours.

for example, think about criminal trials where there are tons of counts. Those counts don't add much length to the trial, but they do add additional time in the jury box.

Hope you are right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:03 PM

11. I'm just disappointed this doesn't tie back well to Russia or 2016

Takes some of the punch out of this and wastes an opportunity to further delegitimize him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amishman (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:42 PM

12. I agree n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:52 PM

13. One pundit said that other Articles would require arguing over witnesses,

while the two they filed already have witnesses--no court delays.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 12:57 PM

14. The Senate WILL be a circus ...

... no matter what the Articles say. Look at all the clowns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:05 PM

15. 2 articles for 2 scoops

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IronLionZion (Reply #15)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 06:48 PM

50. LOL! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:07 PM

16. Also, think about this scenario:

The Senate subpoenas Mulvaney or Pompeo and Trump refuses to let them testify?

Since one of the Articles will be "Obstruction of Congress" and the Senate is one of the branches of Congress, how would they react if they are obstructed by Donald Trump??

Could they simply ignore it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:12 PM

18. The MAGAts will - because they just don't get irony.

But it'll look incredibly bad for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:11 PM

17. Maybe the actual strategy is two articles... this time...

If I were Nancy, I'd file these two, then file MORE articles of impeachment in a few weeks or maybe a couple of months - that's actually a brilliant way to keep the MAGAts reeling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:16 PM

19. Saving Obstruction of Justice for the next round?

If more news comes out about emoluments, who knows?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:11 PM

30. Obstruction of Congress IS Obstruction of Justice, just a narrower scope

And one fully within the House's control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #30)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:23 PM

39. I think Obstruction of Congress may be more difficult for the Senate to dismiss?

Because it is about their duties under the Constitution. Of course, that is probably not their primary concern?

Obstruction of Justice is easier for them to sell as just partisan politics, in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #39)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:32 PM

41. Yes

It's also much easier to prove and doesn't require a lot of outside evidence or witnesses.

Essentially, they're saying he obstructed justice by refusing to comply with Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:45 PM

45. Yep.

Those two Articles can cover a lot of territory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to backscatter712 (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 06:54 PM

51. the House doesn't have to send the matter to the Senate any time soon.

John Dean's suggested strategy is to sit on these while gathering evidence that will drive more hearings and move public opinion to critical mass. When McConnell sees that his majority is endangered, he will drop Trump into the lake of fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Grasswire2 (Reply #51)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 08:28 PM

54. Absolutely. If you want my opinion, send the impeachment to the Senate after Super Tuesday.

With Republicans not having to worry about being primaried by the nutjobs in the base, some attitudes will shift, and you'll see the endangered ones distancing themselves from Trump as much as possible.

Then the second impeachment should be our October Surprise...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:20 PM

20. The doom addicts and self proclaimed DU experts are unhappy

That tells me it was the right move.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #20)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 08:51 AM

59. lol

stop!lol

Sorry.. ".. the doom addicts.. " omg I don't why I think that's so funny.. probably because I know exactly what you mean!

Some barometer, eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 01:20 PM

21. Ahh, ye olde K.I.S.S. concept.

Keep. It. Simple, Stupid.

Sure, Id love to see a dozen Articles of Impeachment. Id love 100 of em! Or thousands - one for every lie hes told to hoodwink America and CHEAT his way to a win.

But this is okay. Ill take two. Im okay with it.

Whatever works.

Whatever gets us there!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 02:50 PM

22. Alternative view ..Dem strategist

Note: Were going to be bummers this morning. Yes, we are very happy to see that there are articles of impeachment. But we are enormously frustrated that they dont go further. We do not understand why obstruction of justice was left out. We dont understand why Richard Neal was standing on the dais when hes done exactly jack shit to hold Trump accountable. And we sure as hell dont understand how a party holding these cards could still be so afraid that theyre going to step on their own impeachment press conference with another one an hour later that gives Trump a win on one of his signature campaign promises. So no, were not celebrating. We hope to be back to our normally sunny selves tomorrow. Have a great Tuesday, everybody.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:05 PM

25. Who is the strategist?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #25)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:18 PM

36. Wiki..

Adam Julian Parkhomenko (born October 22, 1985) is an American political strategist and organizer who served as National Field Director for the Democratic National Committee in 2016.[1] He was the co-founder and executive director of Ready for Hillary, a super PAC established to persuade Hillary Clinton to run for the presidency of the United States in 2016.[2][3][4] In the 2017 party election, Parkhomenko was a candidate for Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee.[5]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #36)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:38 PM

44. So which are his words and which are yours?

Im not sure Id take someone seriously who uses the phrase jack shit. Its fine for posters here to use, but otherwise...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BannonsLiver (Reply #44)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 04:21 PM

46. Yes, he's irreverent, and brilliant and funny as hell

@adamparkhomento

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #46)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 04:26 PM

47. I think like a lot of people here he hasn't actually read the articles yet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #46)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 10:41 AM

61. Yes to all three!

And hes right, in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 02:52 PM

23. Thanks for this.......very helpful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:04 PM

24. Brilliant Strategy!...

Two charges that you really can't deny and Trump sycophants can't say that Pelosi did this out of hate. So that will peel away some Trump fans and no doubt more things are going to come out from now till November so Trump is basically in check. I see this as a slow bleed as more news comes out in the following months. After he's impeached in the House, how many more cockroaches will want to scurry out to be on the right side of history?

Cognitive dissonance is a bitch to break, but with eleven months to go, maybe some truth can be hammered into the wing nuts heads so we can peel even more away. Now we're on higher ground which we knew we were and in a better position to be heard and felt!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:07 PM

27. ?!?! They'll make it a circus come hell or high water?! NOTHING Dems do will give a high proababilit

... that kGOP will acK right.

Republicans can call all the witness's they want to call and they will !!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:11 PM

29. If they can get 51 votes.

There is no VP to break a tie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:12 PM

31. +1, we'll see ... I can't give them the benefit of the doubt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:15 PM

34. We really don't know which Senators might choose to take the trial very seriously?

It could be three or four we hardly ever hear from?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #34)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 05:35 PM

48. After seeing Pompeo's punk ass stand there while the Russian foreign minister said what he

... said, I'm losing hope that Republicans want anything to do with democracy any longer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #29)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:15 PM

35. VP doesn't break a tie in impeachments

Since there is no tie to break If it's 50-50, he's acquitted. If 2/3 of the Senate doesn't vote to convict, it doesn't matter how many votes there are on the other side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #35)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:27 PM

40. Trump probably wants a majority to say that he is acquitted.

He will not be happy if four Repubs vote with the Democrats.

Good to know he is acquitted with a 50/50 vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #40)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:35 PM

43. Yes.

He's acquitted with anything less than 67 senators voting to convict. Even if no one votes to acquit - for example if 66 senators voted to convict and the other 34 senators abstained from voting, he'd still be acquitted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:09 PM

28. Exactly!

Just as bribery would open up the Biden bs and give Republicans a chance to introduce all manner of bs, including trying to haul in the Bidens to testify.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:13 PM

32. I think the Democrats have given this some very serious thought.

Especially Pelosi and Schiff.

What happens if Mitch decides to subpoena Mulvaney and Trump refuses to let him testify because he cannot handle the truth. That would be Obstruction of Congress.

How would Republicans vote on that Article? It would be interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StarfishSaver (Reply #28)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:13 PM

33. Can't they still introduce all matters of BS via overruling the CJ? The CJ for Johnson was overruled

... constantly during his 3 impeachment trials.

Collins et al are just like the rest of them; not interested in this democracy thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #33)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:21 PM

38. They can try

But I doubt they can get 51 votes to overrule an evidentiary ruling by the conservative Chief Justice of the United States. And if they get the votes nd try to force them to appear, it will be pretty clear that this is a circus.

He'll probably be acquitted anyway, but if they do it this way, they'll have a lot of trouble in 2020. And Mitch does NOT want to lose his majority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:20 PM

37. Recommended.

Simplicity is one key in making a public case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 03:33 PM

42. Arguing technicalities on patterns of gross abuse would be fruitless

SCOTUS ruled long ago that yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater was not a protected type of free speech, and some Justice or another said he couldn't define pornography, but he knew it when he saw it.

You don't need to think twice about the crook in the White House, unless you're arguing semantics or wondering how someone with tons of money sports a history of multiple bankruptcies and invisible tax returns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Tue Dec 10, 2019, 09:20 PM

55. "Both require a minimal number of witnesses." For whom?

 

Dumpster's can witness the definition of "Abuse of Power" to death...and will.

Obstruction of Congress....I'll bet you they have 50 legal scholars ready to testify that The House has a way to compel testimony...the Courts.. and that the House didn't pursue their options..,,thus trying to eliminate the 3 co-equal Branch idea.
"House does not wish for the Senate to be a circus, just a representative body for the American people."
That's not the role of the Senate...that's the role of the House...that's why Impeachment is done in the House...It's why it called The House of Representatives.

Regardless....the Senate will do what they've done.. like they did during the Clinton and Johnson deals... yeah...um no..Pass.
It's all about election day...that's Dumpster removal day

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread