[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Here Comes The Next Economic Shock: Student Loan Default Wave = $63 Billion GDP Hit America Vs China trade war Japan Made An Effort to Have a Healthy Nation Brutal MAGA Hat Assault: WSU Instructor Fired After Attacking Student [WATCH] Oklahoma City Bombing RARE footage China Is In Economic Dire Straits And They're No Longer Able To Hide It The ex-NATO commander has figured out Putin's "plan": It will end soon. Odessa get ready Reform UK’s Nigel Farage Tied With Labour PM Keir Starmer in New Opinion Poll Visualizing America's $19 Trillion Consumer Economy In One Chart US Prisoner Life Expectancy We can send Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens in jail. China Tests Novel Non-Nuclear Hydrogen Bomb - Generates Intense Fireball Stablecoins Are the Equivalent of the Pallets of Cash That Went to Iraq LA County Quality Of Life Index Stuck At A 10-Year Low; New Survey Finds This is the only ad anyone other than a Dem needs for the Primaries! Marketing campaign complete! Putin will DIE like HITLER! Russian generals to be ELIMINATED in BUNKER! Dire CONSEQUENCES of WAR! The King, the Thief, and the Spy - A Still Secret WW2 Scandal DARPA Unclassified documents confirm SARS-CoV-2 was created by EcoHealth Alliance Interview with Dr. Steven Greer About Advanced Tech, Govt Secrecy (VIDEO) What Russia Doesn't Want You to Know About Siberia 4705, Two Senators Introduce a Bill to End the Fed !!! 4705 Col Doug Macgregor: Russia will NOT Stand By if Iran's Attacked Karmelo Anthony And America's Race Problem Mark Felton: State Secrets - Still Classified WWII Subjects Yemeni forces shoot down second American MQ-9 spy drone within 24 hours Victor Davis Hanson: Trump’s Counterrevolution Strategy—Flood the Zone, Drain the Swamp Bush-Era Swamp Creature Revealed To Be Key Figure In OKC Bombing Coverup Doc's off plying her tradecraft This is Easter What's Her Face: Surveillance State

Immigration
See other Immigration Articles

Title: With the Stroke of a Pen Trump Just Gave Us 80% More Deportation Officers - 31,000 New Badges
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://www.westernjournal.com/stro ... ion-officers-31000-new-badges/
Published: Jan 26, 2025
Author: Horse
Post Date: 2025-01-26 07:51:33 by Horse
Keywords: None
Views: 498
Comments: 16

For those wondering how President Donald Trump is going to find the personnel to crack down on illegal immigration like he promised during the campaign, it appears he’s managed to start with the old Barack Obama standby: a pen and a phone.

And his people didn’t even need the phone, for good measure.

On Thursday, the administration’s acting Department of Homeland Security secretary, Benjamine Huffman, announced that she was issuing “a directive essential to fulfilling President Trump’s promise to carry out mass deportations” — a move that would deputize law enforcement officials in four federal enforcement branches to “investigate and apprehend illegal aliens,” the media release read.

“The directive gives Department of Justice (DOJ) law enforcement officials in the U.S. Marshals, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons authority to investigate and apprehend illegal aliens,” the media release read.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

#1. To: Horse (#0)

“The directive gives Department of Justice (DOJ) law enforcement officials in the U.S. Marshals, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons authority to investigate and apprehend illegal aliens,” the media release read.

It seems these 31,000 new badges will not be new hires, but their duties simply reassigned to existing personnel. ;)

BTP Holdings  posted on  2025-01-26   15:29:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

“The directive gives Department of Justice (DOJ) law enforcement officials in the U.S. Marshals, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons authority to investigate and apprehend illegal aliens,” the media release read.

It seems these 31,000 new badges will not be new hires, but their duties simply reassigned to existing personnel. ;)

=============

31,000 new badges

Completely unnecessary. Dangerous to our freedoms.

Disband the ATF and the DEA...

watchman, I had a feeling you and I would be on the same page...and maybe the same list...

By Deception Thou Shalt Do War.

Screw Up: 8 Million Americans Are On The List To Be Disappeared

"...Americans read these news articles and wonder. Bill Ayers is a friend of the President and ten other people in the president’s administration. Ayers said 25 million Americans need to go to prison camps. Maybe only 8 million will go in the First Round of Disappearances and 17 million more go in the Second and Third Rounds.

Here is the Stupid Part. BOG does not have enough people willing to round up 8 million Americans on Day One of the first round of Disappearances. Suppose they declared martial law and drew up secret orders the day after the Dollar crashes. They have all FBI agents, armed IRS agents, Federal Marshalls and a few thousand others from Homeland Security report to a hundred locations throughout America in the early morning hours of the first day after martial law is declared. That’s enough manpower to go out and get the 20,000 most dangerous men on the Main Core list of 8,000,000. For the benefit of those who graduated from the California public school system, I will subtract 20,000 from the Main Core list for you. That will leave 7,980,000 people to be picked up on Days 2 to 400..."

vidrebel.wordpress.com/20...e-list-to-be-disappeared/

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2025-01-27   14:14:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

By Deception Thou Shalt Do War.

Screw Up: 8 Million Americans Are On The List To Be Disappeared

btw, I noticed one of the first things Trump said in his inaugural speech, I think it was, that "we are going to institute a NATIONAL EMERGENCY at the Southern Border," or words to that effect...

In 1933, under the guise of "National Emergency", the banksters seized the gold and made US citizens "enemies of the state", and the US Constitution, for all intents and purposes, died.

"A Special Report on the

National Emergency

in the United States of America

by Dr. Eugene Schroder

...In 1933 (Exhibit 9), Congressman Beck, speaking from the Congressional Record, states,

"I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been suggested in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of emergency is the worst. It means that when Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. This means its death. It is the very doctrine that the German chancellor is invoking today in the dying hours of the parliamentary body of the German republic, namely, that because of an emergency, it should grant to the German chancellor absolute power to pass any law, even though the law contradicts the Constitution of the German republic. Chancellor Hitler is at least frank about it. We pay the Constitution lip-service, but the result is the same."

Congressman Beck is saying that, of all the damnable heresies that ever existed, this doctrine of emergency has got to be the worst, because once Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. He goes on to say,

"But the Constitution of the United States, as a restraining influence in keeping the federal government within the carefully prescribed channels of power, is moribund, if not dead. We are witnessing its death-agonies, for when this bill becomes a law, if unhappily it becomes a law, there is no longer any workable Constitution to keep the Congress within the limits of its Constitutional powers."

What bill is Congressman Beck talking about? In 1933, "the House passed the Farm Bill by a vote of more than three to one." Again, we see the doctrine of emergency. Once an emergency is declared, there is no Constitution.

The cause and effect of the doctrine of emergency is the subject of this Report.

In 1973, in Senate Report 93-549 (Exhibit 10), the first sentence reads,

"Since March the 9th, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency."

Let's go back to Exhibit 9 just before this. What did that say? It says that if a national emergency is declared, there is no Constitution. Now, let us return to Exhibit 10. Since March the 9th of 1933, the United States has been, in fact, in a state of declared national emergency.

Referring to the middle of this exhibit:

"This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens"

and this situation has continued uninterrupted since March the 9th of 1933.

In the introduction to Senate Report 93-549 (Exhibit 11):

"A majority of the people of the United States have lived all their lives under emergency rule."

Remember, this report was produced in 1973. The introduction goes on to say:

"For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought into force by states of national emergency."

The introduction continues:

"And, in the United States, actions taken by the government in times of great crisis have -- from, at least, the Civil War -- in important ways shaped the present phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency."

How many people were taught that in school? How could it possibly be that something which could suspend our Constitution would not be taught in school? Amazing, isn't it?

Where does this (Exhibit 12) come from? Is it possible that, in our Constitution, there could be some section which could contemplate what these previous documents are referring to? In Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution of the United States of America, we find the following words:

"The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public Safety may require it."

Habeas Corpus - the Great Writ of Liberty. This is the writ which guarantees that the government cannot charge us and hold us with any crime, unless they follow the procedure of due process of law. This writ also says, in effect, that the privilege of due process of law cannot be suspended, and that the government cannot not operate its arbitrary prerogative power against We the People. But we see that the great Writ of Liberty can, in fact, under the Constitution, be suspended when an invasion or a rebellion necessitates it.

In the 5th Amendment to the Constitution (Exhibit 13), it says:

"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...".

We reserved the charging power for ourselves, didn't we? We didn't give that power to the government. And we also said that the government would be powerless to charge one of the citizens or one of the peoples of the United States with a crime unless We, the People, through our grand jury, orders it to do so through an indictment or a presentment. And if We, the People, don't order it, the government cannot do it. If it tried to do it, we would simply follow the Writ of Habeas Corpus, and they would have to release us, wouldn't they? They could not hold us.

But let us recall that, in Exhibit 13, it says:

"except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in times of War or public danger..."

We can see here that the framers of the Constitution were already contemplating times when there would be conditions under which it might be necessary to suspend the guarantees of the Constitution.

Also from Senate Report 93-549 (Exhibit 14), and remember that our congressmen wrote these reports and these documents and they're talking about these emergency powers and they say:

"They are quite careful and restrictive on the power, but the power to suspend is specifically contemplated by the Constitution in the Writ of Habeas Corpus."

Now, this is well known. This is not a concept that was not known to rulers for many, many years. The concepts of constitutional dictatorship went clear back to the Roman Republic. And there, it was determined that, in times of dire emergencies, yes, the constitution and the rights of the people could be suspended, temporarily, until the crisis, whatever its nature, could be resolved.

But once it was done, the Constitution,was to be returned to its peacetime position of authority. In France, the situation under which the constitution could be suspended is called the State of Siege. In Great Britain, it's called the Defense of the Realm Acts. In Germany, in which Hitler became a dictator, it was simply called Article 48. In the United States, it is called the War Powers.

If that was, in fact, the case, and we are under a war emergency in this country, then there should be evidence of that war emergency in the current law that exists today. That means we should be able to go to the federal code known as the USC or United States Code, and find that statute, that law, in existence. And if we went to the library today and picked up a copy of 12 USC and went to Section 95 (b) (Exhibit 15), we will find a law which states:

"The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by Subsection (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6th, 1917, as amended [12 USCS Sec. 95a], are hereby approved and confirmed. (Mar. 9, 1933, c. 1, Title 1, Sec. 1, 48 Stat. 1.)".

Now, what does this mean? It means that everything the President or the Secretary of the Treasury has done since March the 4th of 1933, or anything that the President or the Secretary of the Treasury is hereafter going to do, is automatically approved and confirmed. Referring back to Exhibit 10, let us remember that, according to the Congressional Record of 1973, the United States has been in a state of national emergency since 1933. Then we realize that 12 USC, Section 95 (b) is current law. This is the law that exists over this United States right this moment.

If that be the case, let us see if we can understand what is being said here. As every action, rule or law put into effect by the President or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th of 1933 has or will be confirmed and approved, let us determine the significance of that date in history. What happened on March the 4th of 1933?

On March the 4th of 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was inaugurated as President of the United States. Referring to his inaugural address, which was given at a time when the country was in the throes of the Great Depression, we read (Exhibit 16):

"I am prepared under my constitutional duty to recommend the measures that a stricken nation in the midst of a stricken world may require. These measures, or such other measures as the Congress may build out of its experience and wisdom, I shall seek, within my constitutional authority, to bring to speedy adoption. But in the event that the Congress shall fail to take one of these two courses, and in the event that the national emergency is still critical, I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis -- broad Executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe."

On March the 4th, 1933, at his inaugural, President Roosevelt was saying that he was going to ask Congress for the extraordinary authority available to him under the War Powers Act. Let's see if he got it.

On March the 5th, President Roosevelt asked for a special and extraordinary session of Congress in Proclamation 2038. He called for the special session of Congress to meet on March the 9th at noon. And at that Congress, he presented a bill, an Act, to provide for relief in the existing national emergency in banking and for other purposes.

In the enabling portion of that Act (Exhibit 17), it states:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Congress hereby declares that a serious emergency exists and that it is imperatively necessary speedily to put into effect remedies of uniform national application."

What is the concept of the rule of necessity, referred to in the enabling portion of the Act as "imperatively necessary speedily"? The rule of necessity is a rule of law which states that necessity knows no law. A good example of the rule of necessity would be the concept of self-defense. The law says, "Thou shalt not kill". But also know that, if you are in dire danger, in danger of losing your life, then you have the absolute right of self-defense. You have the right to kill to protect your own life. That is the ultimate rule of necessity.

Thus we see that the rule of necessity overrides all other law, and, in fact, allows one to do that which would normally be against the law. So it is reasonable to assume that the wording of the enabling portion of the Act of March 9, 1933, is an indication that what follows is something which will probably be against the law. It will probably be against the Constitution of the United States, or it would not require that the rule of necessity be invoked to enact it.

In the Act of March 9, 1933 (Exhibit 17), it further states in Title 1, Section 1:

"The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March the 4th, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and confirmed."

Where have we read those words before?

This is the exact same wording as is found (Exhibit 15) today in Title 12, USC 95 (b). The language in Title 12, USC 95 (b) is exactly the same as that found in the Act of March 9, 1933, Chapter 1, Title 1, Section 48, Statute 1. The Act of March 9, 1933, is still in full force and effect today. We are still under the Rule of Necessity. We are still in a declared state of national emergency, a state of emergency which has existed, uninterrupted, since 1933, or for over sixty years.

As you may remember, the authority to do this is conferred by Subsection (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended. What was the authority which was used to declare and enact the emergency in this Act? If we look at the Act of October 6, 1917 (Exhibit 18), we see that at the top right-hand part of the page, it states that this was:

"An Act To define, regulate, and punish trading with the enemy, and for other purposes.

By the year 1917, the United States was involved in World War I; at that point, it was recognized that there were probably enemies of the United States, or allies of enemies of the United States, living within the continental borders of our nation in a time of war.

Therefore, Congress passed this Act which identified who could be declared enemies of the United States, and, in this Act, we gave the government total authority over those enemies to do with as it saw fit. We also see, however, in Section 2, Subdivision (c) in the middle, and again at the bottom of the page:

other than citizens of the United States."

The Act specifically excluded citizens of the United States, because we realized in 1917 that the citizens of the United States were not enemies. Thus, we were excluded from the war powers over enemies in this Act.

Section 5 (b) of the same Act (Exhibit 19), states:

"That the President may investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, export or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, transfers of credit in any form (other than credits relating solely to transactions to be executed wholly within the United States)".

Again, we see here that citizens, and the transactions of citizens made wholly within the United States, were specifically excluded from the war powers of this Act. We, the People, were not enemies of our country; therefore, the government did not have total authority over us as they were given over our enemies.

It is important to draw attention again to the fact that citizens of the United States in October, 1917, were not called enemies. Consequently the government, under the war powers of this Act, did not have authority over us; we were still protected by the Constitution. Granted, over enemies of this nation, the government was empowered to do anything it deemed necessary, but not over us. The distinction made between enemies of the United States and citizens of the United States will become crucial later on.

In Section 2 of the Act of March 9, 1933 (Exhibit 17), "Subdivision (b) of Section 5 of the Act of October 6, 1917 (40 Stat. L. 411), as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows;

So we see that they are now going to amend Section 5 (b). Now let's see how it reads after it's amended. The amended version of Section 5 (b) reads (emphasis is ours):

"During time of war or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof'.

What just happened? At as far as commercial, monetary or business transactions were concerned, the people of the United States were no longer differentiated from any other enemy of the United States. We had lost that crucial distinction. Comparing Exhibit 17 with Exhibit 19, we can see that the phrase which excluded transactions executed wholly within the United States has been removed from the amended version of Section 5 (b) of the Act of March 9, 1933, Section 2, and replaced with "by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof'. All monetary transactions, whether domestic or international in scope, were now placed at the whim of the President of the United States through the authority given to him by the Trading with the enemy Act.

To summarize this critical point: On October the 6th of 1917, at the beginning of America's involvement in World War 1, Congress passed a Trading with the enemy Act empowering the government to take control over any and all commercial, monetary or business transactions conducted by enemies or allies of enemies within our continental borders. That Act also defined the term "enemy" and excluded from that definition citizens of the United States.

In Section 5 (b) of this Act, we see that the President was given unlimited authority to control the commercial transactions of defined enemies, but we see that credits relating solely to transactions executed wholly within the United States were excluded from that controlling authority. As transactions wholly domestic in nature were excluded from authority, the government had no extraordinary control over the daily business conducted by the citizens of the United States, because we were certainly not enemies.

Citizens of the United States were not enemies of their country in 1917, and the transactions conducted by citizens within this country were not considered to be enemy transactions. But in looking again at Section 2 of the Act of March 9, 1933, (Exhibit 17), we can see that the phrase excluding wholly domestic transactions has been removed from the amended version and replaced with "by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof'.

The people of the United States were now subject to the power of the Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6,1917, as amended. For the purposes of all commercial, monetary and, in effect, all business transactions, We, the People became the same as the enemy, and were treated no differently. There was no longer any distinction.

It is important here to note that, in the Acts of October 6, 1917 and March 9, 1933, it states: "during times of war or during any other national emergency declared by the President..". So we now see that the war powers not only included a period of war, but also a period of "national emergency" as defined by the President of the United States. When either of these two situations occur, the President may, (Exhibit 17)

"through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, investigate, regulate or prohibit under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President and export, hoarding, melting or earmarking of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency by any person within the United States or anyplace subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

What can the President do now to the We, the People, under this Section? He can do anything he wants to do. It's purely at his discretion, and he can use any agency or any license that he desires to control it. This is called a constitutional dictatorship.

In Senate Document 93-549 (Exhibit 20), Congress declared that a serious emergency exists, at:

"48 Stat. 1. The exclusion of domestic transactions, formerly found in the Act, was deleted from Sect. 5 (b) at this time."

Our Congress wrote that in the year 1973.

Now let's find out about the Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917. Quoting from a Supreme Court decision (Exhibit 21), Stoehr v. Wallace, 1921:

"The Trading With the Enemy Act, originally and as amended, is strictly a war measure, and finds its sanction in the provision empowering Congress "to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water" Const. Art. 1, Sect. 8, c]. 11. P. 241".

Remember your Constitution? "Congress shall have the power to declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal and make all rules concerning the captures on the land and the water of the enemies." All rules.

If that be the case, let us look at the memorandum of law that now covers trading with the enemy, the "Memorandum of American Cases and Recent English Cases on The Law of Trading With the Enemy" (Exhibit 22), remembering that we are now the same as the enemy. In this memorandum, we read:

"Every species of intercourse with the enemy is illegal. This prohibition is not limited to mere commercial intercourse."..."

you can read the rest here:

www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/emer.html

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2025-01-27   14:48:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"A Special Report on the

National Emergency

in the United States of America

by Dr. Eugene Schroder

I read this entire post, some of it aloud to a family member.

Very clearly written. My understanding has increased. Thank you.

watchman  posted on  2025-01-27   20:10:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

You're very welcome. It goes even way beyond that, how they have set out to destroy this country...from the time of the American Revolution (In my long-standing opinion, it is a war against the cross at Cape Henry in 1607, and the charter to spread the gospel, etc.: avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/va01.asp / 1607covenant.com/americas-covenant-with-god/ / firstlanding1607.com/the-short-story/ / The enduring legacy of the First Landing www.wnd.com/2007/04/41327/ ). My computer wouldn't allow me to go online after I posted the above "National Emergency" article the other day. I had to force shut it down and lost probably at least a hundred and maybe double that of my most current tabs, containing a lot of that info. Amidst all the chaos going on at home, I will have to try to recover some of that stuff from my history file, an additional job I did not need. Feeling very cranky at the moment.

I just got finished half-listening to the speech I was referring to above: Trump says it was being made on MLK day...was that before the inauguration?...where Trump declared the NATIONAL EMERGENCY on the border. Also forgot he did mention he was taking us into America's "Golden Age" which sounds very occultish to me but I haven't had a chance to pursue it.

The speech:

Trump Speech LIVE | President trump declares national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border | US News

www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtcIq28xf9Q

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2025-01-29   14:20:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#11. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#9) (Edited)

he was taking us into America's "Golden Age"

This, I believe, is a reference to the 10 toes of Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue with 10 toes of mixed iron and clay.

The Romans referred to their empire as the Golden Age.

The 10 toes of the statue have traditionally been determined the prophecy of the 𝙧𝙚𝙫𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙙 Roman empire.

Elon's salute at the inauguration was the salute used in days of the old Roman empire.

watchman  posted on  2025-01-29 14:55:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]