• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Newt/Perry- not enough backers to get on VA ballot

Help Support Ranchers.net:

A

Anonymous

Guest
Even with paid signature gatherers- Newt couldn't get enough backers to get on Virginia's ballot- his home state since 1999...

Gingrich, Perry fail to qualify for GOP primary ballot in Virginia

By Steve Brusk, CNN
updated 4:20 PM EST, Sat December 24, 2011


Washington (CNN) -- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich failed to collect enough signatures to appear on the Virginia primary ballot, the Republican Party of Virginia announced Saturday morning, leaving the longtime Virginia resident without a place on the state's ballot and raising questions about his campaign's organization.

Gingrich, as well as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, did not meet the state's requirement of 10,000 signatures and, therefore, did not qualify for the ballot, the Virginia GOP said via Twitter.

The state GOP announced Perry's failure to qualify late Friday.

Gingrich's campaign responded with some strong words in a statement Saturday, saying the process to qualify for the ballot is "a failed system."

"Voters deserve the right to vote for any top contender, especially leading candidates," campaign director Michael Krull said in the statement. "We will work with the Republican Party of Virginia to pursue an aggressive write-in campaign to make sure that all the voters of Virginia are able to vote for the candidate of their choice."

However, Virginia state law specifically prohibits voters from writing in candidates not on the ballot in primary elections.

The news from the Virginia Republicans is a significant setback for Gingrich, who clamored earlier this week to gather enough voter signatures in the state. Gingrich utilized paid staffers to comb Virginia, asking voters to sign petitions that would allow him a place on the ballot.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
Oldtimer said:
Even with paid signature gatherers- Newt couldn't get enough backers to get on Virginia's ballot- his home state since 1999...

Gingrich, Perry fail to qualify for GOP primary ballot in Virginia

By Steve Brusk, CNN
updated 4:20 PM EST, Sat December 24, 2011


Washington (CNN) -- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich failed to collect enough signatures to appear on the Virginia primary ballot, the Republican Party of Virginia announced Saturday morning, leaving the longtime Virginia resident without a place on the state's ballot and raising questions about his campaign's organization.

Gingrich, as well as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, did not meet the state's requirement of 10,000 signatures and, therefore, did not qualify for the ballot, the Virginia GOP said via Twitter.

The state GOP announced Perry's failure to qualify late Friday.

Gingrich's campaign responded with some strong words in a statement Saturday, saying the process to qualify for the ballot is "a failed system."

"Voters deserve the right to vote for any top contender, especially leading candidates," campaign director Michael Krull said in the statement. "We will work with the Republican Party of Virginia to pursue an aggressive write-in campaign to make sure that all the voters of Virginia are able to vote for the candidate of their choice."

However, Virginia state law specifically prohibits voters from writing in candidates not on the ballot in primary elections.

The news from the Virginia Republicans is a significant setback for Gingrich, who clamored earlier this week to gather enough voter signatures in the state. Gingrich utilized paid staffers to comb Virginia, asking voters to sign petitions that would allow him a place on the ballot.

If only he had conferred with obama to find out how to get those dead voters to sign for him.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
Maybe he should have used the ACORN groups that obama used, recon oldtimer?????
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Getting 10,000 signatures has nothing to do with the level of support that Newt has, but unfortunately it does have to do with the level of organization within his campaign......too much time spent dealing with frivilous attacks from the left, would be my guess......

The left tries to do the same thing with all possible candidates.....think Ssarah Palin, they tried to make it so she was defending herself against so many false accusations, that any campaign would be misdirected in 100 directions, and this is also an attempt to keep the voters from investigating and knowing the truly important info., when it comes to a candidate.

It's much like the lying and misrepresentations we see on Ranchers, by Liberals/Progressives. in attempts to deligitamize the opinions of others......


The only ones that lose are the voters........

Goldman helps Newt with Va. ballot
By: Mike Allen
December 26, 2011 08:56 PM EST

Paul Goldman, a Richmond lawyer who is a former Virginia Democratic party chairman, is helping represent a conservative group in challenging Newt Gingrich's disqualification from the Old Dominion ballot on March 6, Super Tuesday.

Bill Pascoe, executive vice president of Citizens for the Republic, said: “We are teaming up with former Virginia Democratic Party Chairman Paul Goldman to make sure the voters of the Commonwealth have a fair and transparent presidential primary process. ...

"A website will be up within the week."

The battle to challenge the ballot ruling is uphill. Goldman refused to say what approach he has in mind. "But rest assured this is not an academic exercise as will be clear shortly," he said in an email.

"[T]his isn't a partisan or even candidate specific thing, but far more important, about the right to vote in Virginia on the presidency," Goldman wrote. "The people of Virginia expect their right to choose to be upheld."

Here is the complete release:

Virginia Presidential Ballot Certification Challenged

Citizens for the Republic Executive Vice President Bill Pascoe today announced that CFTR will work with former Virginia Democratic Party Chairman Paul Goldman to ensure that Virginia’s March 6 GOP presidential primary offers the Republican voters of the Commonwealth a fair and honest election, where they can vote for the candidate of their choice.

"We are announcing today that we are teaming up with former Virginia Democratic Party Chairman Paul Goldman to make sure the voters of the Commonwealth have a fair and transparent presidential primary process,” said Pascoe. “As a Democrat, Mr. Goldman – who has a demonstrated history of success in expanding ballot access in Virginia – brings clean hands to the effort. He doesn’t have a horse in this race, so no one can claim he’s acting on behalf of anyone other than the citizens of Virginia.

“Further, Paul has been working this year with Governor McDonnell, Senators Warner and Webb, and Congressman Cantor, along with other Democrats and Republicans, to pass bipartisan legislation aimed at giving the children of Virginia modern, 21st century schools. So it’s a natural fit to ask him to work with, and help represent us, in this bipartisan effort.

“According to press reports over the weekend,” continued Pascoe, “the Chairman of the Virginia Republican Party, per Section 24.2-545 of the Code of Virginia, has indicated that he will be certifying only two candidates for inclusion on the 2012 GOP presidential primary ballot. Based on our collective knowledge and understanding of the state's election laws – including a previous successful legal action by Mr. Goldman as concerns a Democratic Party nomination process – we intend to formally challenge such certification for specific reasons to be detailed at the appropriate time.

“We hope this matter can be settled without a court challenge,” said Pascoe. “Accordingly, we have asked Mr. Goldman to begin contacting the relevant parties tomorrow in hopes of expediting such a fair and transparent resolution.

“Our mutual goal is to ensure that the voting rights of the citizens of Virginia are fully protected. As with everything we do in the field of public policy, CFTR’s goal is to empower the individual, in the belief that a free choice in the marketplace of ideas is what Virginians want to have their leaders achieve in time for 2012 presidential primary.”
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well if he can't set up an organization in his home state- hows he expect do do it in a country... :???:

And here I thought you were the one that was complaining before about not enough vetting of the candidates...

Since one of the Repub parties top issues is "Family Values- some have been checking back on them...Newts vetting on his "family values" isn't coming out too shiny either...Apparently not the same as "his memory" now remembers them :roll: ...(But I suppose when you run off chasing every young skirt that comes along- while abandoning your family to live on charity- your memory might try to rationalize it) :wink: :p :lol:

Newly recovered court files cast doubt on Gingrich version of first divorce

By Alan Duke, CNN
updated 7:55 PM EST, Mon December 26, 2011

Newt Gingrich's campaign says he divorced his first wife at her request
Court files in Georgia show she asked the judge not to grant the divorce


Editor's note: Alan Duke grew up in Carrollton, Georgia, and began his career covering politics there. He began covering Newt Gingrich during Gingrich's first campaigns for public office.

Carrollton, Georgia (CNN) -- Newt Gingrich claims that it was his first wife, not Gingrich himself, who wanted their divorce in 1980, but court documents obtained by CNN appear to show otherwise.

The Republican presidential candidate, now in his third marriage, has been peppered with attacks and questions about his divorce from Jackie Gingrich for the past three decades.

Questions about his past -- and what that past tells voters about his personal behavior -- have re-emerged as he has returned to the political scene 13 years after he resigned as speaker of the House.

A new defense that has arisen as Gingrich entered the presidential race this year is the insistence that she, not he, wanted the divorce.

On the "Answering the attacks" page of his campaign website, Newt.org, which "(Sets) the Record Straight: Newt's Positions on the Issues and His Record," the campaign discusses Gingrich's first divorce.

"It was (Jackie Gingrich) that requested the divorce, not Newt," the campaign website said, referring readers to an online column written by Gingrich's youngest daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman, last May.

Cushman, 13 when her parents separated in 1980, was rebutting persistent rumors that her father served divorce papers on her mother the day after cancer surgery. In the column, Cushman writes that papers were never served in the hospital, and that her mother did not actually have cancer.



"My mother and father were already in the process of getting a divorce, which she requested," Cushman wrote.


After initially being told that the divorce documents were sealed, CNN on Thursday obtained the folder containing the filings in the divorce, which had been stashed away for years in a Carroll County, Georgia, court clerk's drawer. Retired clerk Kenneth Skinner told CNN his deputy took Gingrich's file out of the public records room around 1994, "when he (Gingrich) became the center of attention," because Skinner feared tampering and theft.

"During these years, you had to make sure those papers were there," Skinner said. "People could go in those files and get things out. We didn't have enough security to control it."

Current Carroll County Clerk of Court Alan Lee said he called the retired deputy clerk, who told him where to find the papers, after CNN began looking for them last week.

The documents, and interviews with people close to the couple at the time, contradict the Gingrich claim about who wanted the divorce.

Newt Gingrich filed a divorce complaint on July 14, 1980, in Carroll County, saying that "the marriage of the parties is irretriebably (sic) broken."


Jackie Battley Gingrich, the congressman's wife and the mother of Jackie Gingrich Cushman, responded by asking the judge to reject her husband's filing.

"Defendant shows that she has adequate and ample grounds for divorce, but that she does not desire one at this time," her petition said.

"Although defendant does not admit that this marriage is irretrievably broken, defendant has been hopeful that an arrangement for temporary support of defendant and the two minor daughters of the parties could be mutually agreed upon without the intervention of this court," her petition said. "All efforts to date have been unsuccessful."

When CNN presented the information found in the divorce file to the Gingrich campaign, its spokesman stood by the contention that it was Gingrich's ex-wife who asked for the divorce in 1980.

"Carroll County Georgia court documents accurately show Newt Gingrich filed for a divorce from his wife Jackie Battley, but it was Jackie Battley who requested the divorce," spokesman R.C. Hammond said in an e-mail to CNN Saturday. "Gingrich, her husband, obtained legal counsel and filed the divorce papers initiating the legal proceedings."

"It was the same legal proceedings that determined and set the amounts of payments Gingrich would provide to support his two daughters," Hammond said.

Atlanta divorce lawyer Jim Peterson, who was not involved in the Gingrich proceedings, said the wife's divorce filings make it "pretty plain" that she did not want the divorce.

"She obviously didn't want the divorce, on the face of the pleadings," Peterson said.

One reason a defendant in a divorce would deny it was irretrievably broken would be "to make you stay in the marriage and put the screws to you to make it as difficult as they possibly can," Peterson added.

Jackie Gingrich, who has rarely spoken to the media about the divorce, declined CNN's request for an interview. A friend said that Jackie Gingrich did not want to comment out of concern for her daughters and grandchildren.

In a brief interview in 1985, she told the Washington Post: "He can say that we had been talking about it for 10 years, but the truth is that it came as a complete surprise."

Leonard H. "Kip" Carter, a former close Gingrich friend, backed the contention that it was Newt Gingrich who wanted the divorce.

"He (Gingrich) said, 'You know and I know that she's not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,' " Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich's first congressional campaigns.

Carter, who was a fellow history professor when Gingrich taught at West Georgia College in Carrollton, said he broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich because of the congressman's treatment of his wife during the divorce.


Asked in an e-mail whether that conversation in 1980 occurred the way that Carter recounted, Gingrich spokesman Hammond did not respond.

Gerald Johnson, a Georgia state legislator at the time who also was in Gingrich's Sunday school class, said it was his memory that Jackie Gingrich did not want a divorce. Johnson laughed when told the presidential campaign is now saying she requested the divorce, calling that "surprising."

When Gingrich filed for divorce, he was already seeing a 28-year-old congressional aide, whom he married six months after his divorce was final in 1981. The second wife, Marianne Ginther Gingrich, told Esquire magazine last year that Gingrich even introduced her to his parents in the summer of 1980, the same time he filed for divorce.

"They were thrilled because they hadn't wanted Newt to marry (Jackie Battley)," she told Esquire.

Gingrich divorced Marianne Gingrich 19 years later, after an affair with a younger congressional aide whom he married soon after his divorce. The third wife, Callista Bisek Gingrich, is now a major figure in his presidential campaign.

Jackie Gingrich Cushman wrote in May that she and her older sister, Kathy Gingrich Lubbers, "will not answer additional questions or make additional comments regarding this meaningless incident." Both sisters are actively involved in Gingrich's campaign for the Republican nomination.

The court documents obtained by CNN also shed light on the issue of the first-term congressman's record of offering support for Jackie Gingrich and the two girls during the separation and after the divorce.

The same court filing in which Jackie Gingrich told the judge she did not want the divorce also accused Gingrich of failing to provide enough money for her and her two then-teenaged daughters to live on during their separation. Kathy was 17 at the time.

"Despite repeated notice to plaintiff and requests by defendant, plaintiff has failed and refused to voluntarily provide reasonable support sufficient to include payment of usual and normal living expenses, including drugs, water, sewage, garbage, gas, electric and telephone service for defendant and the minor children," she said in court documents. "As a result, many of such accounts are two or three months past due with notices of intent to cut off service and gas and electricity."

When Jackie Gingrich and her daughters moved from their other home in Fairfax, Virginia, back to their house in Carrollton, Georgia, there were "no lights, no heat, no water, no food in the home," former Gingrich friend and academic colleague Carter said.

Carter, who helped collect donations for the family, said Gingrich "wouldn't give them a dime" in the first months of the separation.
"We had a food drive at First Baptist Church," Carter said. "The deacons went down and stocked her pantry."

Johnson, the former state legislator who was in Gingrich's Sunday school class, said when the church's minister asked him to donate money, he gave $100 to the fund.

A judge ordered Gingrich to appear in court a week after his wife filed her complaint. The result was a ruling that he bring the utility bills up to date and begin paying his wife $700 a month in temporary support until the case was settled.

Both sides reached an agreement three months later, avoiding the jury trial that Jackie Gingrich was demanding.

In 1994, Gingrich agreed to increase his alimony payments by $350 to $1,650 a month. In exchange, Jackie Gingrich waived her right to ask for future increases if her ex-husband's income increased. Gingrich is still paying alimony.

"When asked, Gingrich has admitted he has not led a perfect life and has at times had to go to God for forgiveness," Hammond said. "Over 30 years later, the family has long put these matters behind them."

Johnson, who later challenged Gingrich in the 1984 congressional race, said the divorce and controversy over the support payments caused a lot of negative feelings against Gingrich in his home county.

"I think the thing that bothered people most was everybody in Carrollton knew how much Jackie sacrificed to get Newt elected," Johnson said.

CNN asked Gingrich spokesman Hammond in an e-mail about the allegation made by Jackie Gingrich in her October 1980 court filing that Gingrich was not supporting his family during this period, but the statement the campaign released did not directly address that question.

Still, Johnson said there should be forgiveness and he would like to see Gingrich win the White House.

"Newt is the smartest candidate in the field this year and he would bring an intelligence to the White House that hasn't been there in quite a while," Johnson said.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Vetting of candidates does not entail making up crap to divert from the important issues.

Why would you care more about what he does in his bedroom versus his thought on National economic policies?

Why is it so important to demonize him, based on the former..........


When you were sheriff, did you spend more time looking in your neighbour's windows, at night, than you did watching for their dangerous driving?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Vetting of candidates does not entail making up crap to divert from the important issues.

Why would you care more about what he does in his bedroom versus his thought on National economic policies?
Why is it so important to demonize him, based on the former..........

Because for the past 25+ years the Republican Party has made "Family Values"- being bedroom policemen- and Moral Judges as issues that are more important than their economic policies...

But for many of them they can only talk the talk- and can't/don't walk the walk... Newt is one of them...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Vetting of candidates does not entail making up crap to divert from the important issues.

Why would you care more about what he does in his bedroom versus his thought on National economic policies?
Why is it so important to demonize him, based on the former..........

Because for the past 25+ years the Republican Party has made "Family Values"- being bedroom policemen- and Moral Judges as issues that are more important than their economic policies...

But for many of them they can only talk the talk- and can't/don't walk the walk... Newt is one of them...


NO, for 25 years they have wanted to leave it up to the individual and not have the taxpayer pay for the choices the individual makes. It is the left that wants to make further laws about what an individual can and cannot do and have the taxpayer pay for it, or have others' individuals' rights compromised......


What do I care what a politician does in his bedroom and I for sure don't want the emphasis to be on what he/she does in the bedroom over what he/she would do as economic policy.

Which party is emphasizing Newt's marriages and not his personal responsibililty type approach to economics?


One will have more impact on my life and the other less. which is which?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Some folks might ought to worry about their own "Family's Values" instead of worrying about others?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Vetting of candidates does not entail making up crap to divert from the important issues.

Why would you care more about what he does in his bedroom versus his thought on National economic policies?
Why is it so important to demonize him, based on the former..........

Because for the past 25+ years the Republican Party has made "Family Values"- being bedroom policemen- and Moral Judges as issues that are more important than their economic policies...

But for many of them they can only talk the talk- and can't/don't walk the walk... Newt is one of them...


NO, for 25 years they have wanted to leave it up to the individual and not have the taxpayer pay for the choices the individual makes. It is the left that wants to make further laws about what an individual can and cannot do and have the taxpayer pay for it, or have others' individuals' rights compromised......


What do I care what a politician does in his bedroom and I for sure don't want the emphasis to be on what he/she does in the bedroom over what he/she would do as economic policy.

Which party is emphasizing Newt's marriages and not his personal responsibililty type approach to economics?


One will have more impact on my life and the other less. which is which?

So you believe the Republican Party should dump their "family values" and platforms pushing to be the bedroom police ?

Its hard for me to see where 3 wives and letting your family live on charity shows much responsibility- family ways or economic ways...

This pretty much shows the true Newt....Newt cares for only one person- Newt !
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
what is really funny... is how this thread was only about one candidate..

but the fact is...


Five GOP candidates fail to qualify for Virginia primary ballot

Gingrich, Perry, Bachmann, Santorum and Huntsman campaigns, all of them have failed to meet the required 10,000 registered voter signature petition requirement to appear on the Virginia primary ballot taking place March 6, 2011. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have qualified for the primary.

and why is the democratic party challenging the petitions?

In fact, Gingrich is leading among Virginia Republicans, according to a recent survey by Quinnipiac University, taken Dec. 13-19. Among registered Republican voters, 30 percent said they were planning to vote for Gingrich, with 25 percent for Romney, 9 percent for Paul and 6 percent for Perry.

What apparently tripped up Gingrich and Perry was the requirement that petition signers list their addresses.

A Gingrich campaign official prior to the move by the RPV said the problem is how the rules are set up, arguing that the party is, for apparently the first time, cross-checking the addresses that signature-givers gave against the electronic voter database file for accuracies. A name without a proper address match was tossed, the official said.

“What one needs to ask is ‘what percentage of valid, registered voters self-identify a current address that matches voter rolls that the voter might not have updated since 2008”? Are you 100% certain that your address you and all of your neighbors matches current voter rolls?


was it really mismatched addresses? or were those who challenged the petitions allowed to scratch anyone that wasn't a perfect match?

I still can't get past the democratic party getting it's hands into the challenges.. and the state "verifying addresses" for the first time this year?

seems a little fishy that five out of seven contenders didn't qualify..
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
Four Republican presidential candidates – Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and Ron Paul -- submitted paper work in time to qualify for Virginia's March 6 primary ballot.

Romney submitted 16,026 signatures; Paul 14,361; Perry 11,911 and Gingrich 11,050.

Stacy McCain (TheOtherMcCain) notes:

If Romney wants to dispatch lawyers to keep an eye on the validation process, they might be able to disqualify enough petitions to knock Perry and Gingrich off the ballot.





Ashby Law had a blog post on Thursday warning that this would happen, saying that it is,

“…a labor-intensive task so expensive and time-consuming that at least one and possibly more campaigns will not even attempt it this year. And, the very real possibility exists that one or more candidates who made a run at it will come up short and be kept off the Virginia primary ballot as a result.”

The blog goes on to describe the process of gaining ballot access, which is likely the most burdensome in the country:

“A minimum of 10,000 petition signatures collected statewide, including at least 400 from each of its 11 congressional districts. That’s hard enough. But then there are the additional restrictions: The petition circulators must be registered or eligible to vote in Virginia. The signatures must be gathered using the State Board of Elections’ official form, a two-page document which must be reproduced as double-sided. (Single-sided stapled forms are not accepted.) Signatures must be collected on forms that are specific to each city, county and congressional district. Only “qualified” voters may sign a petition. And every single petition form must be sworn and notarized.”

“Any candidate who submits at least 15,000 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions
statewide and has at least 600 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions from each of the 11 Congressional Districts shall be deemed to have met the threshold for qualification and will be certified (provided, of course, that other requirements of State law have also been met)”

“If any candidate submits fewer than 15,000 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions statewide or fewer than 600 signatures of registered voters on valid petitions in one or more of the 11 Congressional Districts, the Republican Party of Virginia will individually verify signatures until the 10,000 signature statewide threshold and/or 400 per Congressional district is met.”

In other words, if a candidate can gather 50% more signatures than actually required, the standard for those signatures is lower than for the signatures of candidates who gather 14,999 signatures or less. It appears that the Romney campaign, which boasted of gathering “some 16,000″ signatures was able to escape the scrutiny of having every signature individually verified. I’m assuming, since the RPV verified Ron Paul’s certification so early that he also met the higher standard. Unfortunately for Perry and Gingrich, they didn’t hit the magic number, so their signatures were held to the higher standard.

“[T]he Party’s plan to scrutinize some candidates’ signatures and not others, based upon the arbitrary standard of whether the candidates submitted a full 50% more than the statutory requirement, violates the Equal Protection Clause

so the rule is get plenty of signatures and you can bypass the certification process?

how many more state ballots can Romney manipulate.. ( I am starting to really not like this guy one bit)..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
oldtimers yelling about family values and bedroom police makes on wonder what he hides, besides the fact he like ZIPPERS :wink: :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
hypocritexposer said:
Perry has now also filed a lawsuit.....

the state is able to set and define it's laws and it is up to the candidate to meet the threshold..

I could understand Perry challenging whether he met the threshold or not, but I disagree with him and Newt filing lawsuits to over-turn VA election law..
 

Latest posts

Top