Attorney General Jim Hood issued the following statement.
The Office of Attorney General placed on its website today a nine-page opinion written by former Mississippi Supreme Court Justice David Chandler, after Chandler and former Mississippi Supreme Court Chief Justice Edwin Lloyd Pittman, who also served as attorney general, reviewed an accompanying 43-page investigative report on whether Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves directly or indirectly, through the effort of his staff or others, was involved in or unduly influenced an attempt to build a $2 million frontage road in Flowood, Miss., which would have connected Reeves' home within a private subdivision to a nearby shopping center.
Due to the public and press interest in this matter, Attorney General Hood asked the two distinguished former Mississippi Supreme Court justices to provide a bipartisan review of this report and to offer their legal opinions based on the evidence presented in the report.
Prior to serving as Chief Justice from 2001-2004, Justice Pittman was elected attorney general in 1984, secretary of state in 1980, and state treasurer in 1976. During Justice Pittman’s tenure as attorney general, he brought several actions for the enforcement of section 109 of the Mississippi Constitution, which addresses conflicts of interest by legislators and local government board members being on both sides of a contract in which they have an interest. This litigation resulted in the consolidation of these cases and those brought by the Ethics Commission into landmark section 109 case of Frazier v. State by and through Pittman, 504 So.2d 675 (Miss. 1987).
Justice Chandler served on the Supreme Court from 2009-2015 and served on the Mississippi Court of Appeals from 2001-2008. In 2015, Republican Gov. Phil Bryant appointed Justice Chandler as the first executive commissioner of the Mississippi Department of Child Protection Services, where he served until 2017. Justice Chandler is an adjunct professor at Mississippi College School of Law.
Justice Chandler sent his 10-page opinion to the Office of Attorney General on Tuesday, September 10, which reads in part:
“A reasonable factfinder could review the evidence in the report and conclude that Lieutenant Governor Reeves wanted the frontage road to be built and additionally applied political pressure to that end. However, I do not believe any evidence in the report establishes that the Lieutenant Governor received or could have potentially received any amount of compensation for the project to an extent that liability arises under Section 109 of the Mississippi Constitution…
“With the above in mind, I will note one potential issue. According to the report, Lieutenant Governor Reeves and his spouse ‘own a membership share in the Oakridge Property Owners’ Association, In. (sic), (OPOA).’ This shareholder membership and the actions of OPOA could potentially implicate Section 109.”
Chief Justice Pittman stated that Section 109 of the Mississippi Constitution may come into play, which provides that:
" ...no public officer or member of the Legislature shall be interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with the State, or any district, county, city or town thereof, authorized by any law passed or order made by any board of which he may be or may have been a member, during the term for which he shall have been chosen, or within one year after the expiration of such term.”
As former attorney general, Chief Justice Pittman observed that the Office of Attorney General properly considered the matter and removed partisan considerations by leaving the matter to the next attorney general, who will take office in the next six months.
Attorney General Hood thanked Justices Pittman and Chandler for their expertise, time and diligence in reviewing the report.
“My view is that the report speaks for itself. It should be read by the press and public, which can make their own judgment as to the actions and conduct of Lt. Governor Reeves.”
The Office of Attorney General will take no further action on this matter. Any action which might be filed by the next attorney general would allow the state to subpoena emails from the Office of Lieutenant Governor and the Senate and secure depositions, the lack of which impeded the present investigation.
Chandler Opinion
Investigative Report
Investigator Summary of Interviews
Kingfish note: Investigating opponent during campaign? What would the same crowd have said if RSS had picked up where he left off on some of his witch hunts over the last six months?
Read the Chandler Opinion. Ten pages but the important section states:
Based on the evidence in the report, Lieutenant Governor Reeves and his office had an interest in the project, but in the sense that they were actively curious about it and lobbied for its origination and completion. Little evidence, though, suggests that the Lieutenant Governor had an interest as contemplated under Section 109.
Cases implicating Section 109 have uniformly involved conflicts where a public servant or legislator have received—or potentially could have received—compensation under a contract or have been appointed to a position for which they received—or potentially could have received—compensation. Frazier, 504 So. 2d at 675; State By & Through Mississippi Ethics Comm’n v. Aseme, 583 So. 2d 955 (Miss. 1991); Towner v. Moore ex rel. Quitman Cty. Sch. Dist., 604 So. 2d 1093 (Miss. 1992). However, I have been unable to identify a case where a public servant was found in violation of Section 109 for potentially realizing a non-monetary, incidental benefit under a contract to which he is not a party. No evidence in the report shows that Lieutenant Governor Reeves received or potentially could have received any compensation under the contract(s) to install the frontage road.
A reasonable factfinder could review the evidence in the report and conclude that Lieutenant Governor Reeves wanted the frontage road to be built and additionally applied political pressure to that end. However, I do not believe any evidence in the report establishes that the Lieutenant Governor received or could have potentially received any amount of compensation for the project to an extent that liability arises under Section 109 of the Mississippi Constitution or Mississippi Code Annotated Section 25-4-105....
The Attorney General possesses the authority to bring the proposed lawsuit for conflicts of interest in the frontage road matter against Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves. I submit, however, that the evidence contained in the report likely falls short in establishing liability under the Mississippi Constitution, Article IV, Section 109, or Mississippi Code Annotated Section 25-4-105. To sustain those actions, the Attorney General would need to prove that the Lieutenant Governor received or could have received compensation under the contracts executed for construction of the frontage road. Lieutenant Governor Reeves’s status as a member of OPOA, and its engagement with MDOT, could raise potential Section 109 violations; however, the report does not contain sufficient evidence to analyze the applicability of that issue.
61 comments:
I’m waiting on POTUS to issue his endorsement, until then I have no opinion on either candidate.
Jimmy Wadd Hood shoots blanks.
The public should know what type of Argasidae the Lt. Gov really is before they vote. Exactly who else would perform the task? Shad?
Kingfish - Try to keep up here. He is not 'investigating during the campaign'. This was done quite awhile ago. Besides, do you believe your chirping 'too late too little' will affect the fact that Reeves used his power to attempt to build a road that would benefit him personally?
Let this whole thing stand on its merits without your spitballing from the bleachers regarding the facts.
What difference does the timing make? All's fair....
The timing on this is rather...ummmm.....suspect.
More details in Mississippi Today.
https://mississippitoday.org/2019/09/11/ag-hood-releases-frontage-road-report-former-judge-finds-reeves-applied-political-pressure-for-project/
Let this whole thing stand on its merits without your spitballing from the bleachers regarding the facts.
What's wrong, no audience for your hallelujah chorus?
September 11, 2019 at 6:25 PM = MT staffer spam
Just when I thought my opinion of Jim Hood couldn't be any lower, BAM! What a desperate move this is by Conway, I mean Jimmy.
Why would anyone want a Frontage road connecting their neighborhood to a shopping center? Most people want want privacy away from retail of ant kind. Can;t see how this would raise property values, and eventually would lower them. Never really insteps told this argument.
Hood's report is like Team Oboma trying to spy on Team Trump during the election and pretending they were in bed with Russians. No matter what the report says or what the reviewers of the report say about the report, it's only one side of the issue. The side of Tater's political opponent. The report is meaningless without Tater's response to it. I'm not suggesting that Tater should respond to it, only that as a stand alone document it's worthless.
5:22 Thanks, it will be interesting to see who POTUS endorses so I can be sure to vote against that candidate.
Bipartisan report? First, Hood has never seen anything bipartisan.
And second, thinking that these two individuals represent a bipartisan consideration shows Hood's total inability to understand partisanship.
Judges are appointed as nonpartisan individuals. The fact that a Republican Governor appointed an individual does not make that person representative of that party - as proven by none other than Governor Barbour appointing Joey Kilgore (son of Chief of Staff to Hood Don Kilgore) as as Judge. Or Former State Senator (Democrat) Randy Pierce.
Chandler ran for the Court of Appeals with nothing but Democratic support, having spent his life as a Democrat operative. Pittman is no doubt a long term democrat.
For Hood to think this passes the smell test is just as ludicrous as his "home office" rented from his daddy in Houston passes the smell test.
But thank you Jim - you have still failed to give any reason for your "investigation" in the first place on this non-issue. We all know it was fostered by the roadbuilders and their attempt to block a renovation to MDOT's operation procedures, festered by none other than Josh Gregory in his attempt to upend Reeves. (How'd that work out for you Josh? Still can't succeed with your running a "non-partisan Judge" Waller so that you could keep your gravy train running smoothly?)
Thanks to Hood for releasing this wonderful report. It is worth nothing more than the political paper it was written on, at public expense of course.
Nothing new here folks. Same ole crap from a Democrat. Nothing to run on that will take care of the people of Mississippi so they have to start slandering and slinging mud like cow shit. Keep it up Jimmy. You've never done a damn thing that has helped the hard working people of this state. Why don't you go ahead and tout the Green New Deal and have AOC visit and politic for you. I'm sure that will be a great thing for the great farmers of this great state. Kill the oil and gas industry. Put all those people out of jobs. Come on Jim. I dare you to invite her to Mississippi assuming she even knows where Mississippi is.
Tate Reeves will be the next Governor of the State of Mississippi. And you can all rest assured that he knows exactly who his friends are and who are his enemies.
No opinion, and more importantly no facts, as to whether any laws were violated. But, it would be foolish to argue that the Little Emperor was not aware of (and supported) the effort to build a private drive for his neighborhood. Speaking of putting the shoe on the other foot, if this had been Hood (or some other Dem), the Little Emperor, Phil, Stacie, and every other Republican would have been all over it. We would have been watching advertisements about it since March. And there would have been countless investigations by the Legislature, the Dept of Public Safety, the State Auditor and every other Republican controlled investigative entity. So, no need to throw out the bullshit about if this was the other party...... Fact is that bullshit political patronage sucks no mater which party commits it....and both do when in power.
Speaking of putting the shoe on the other foot, ...
Why is Hood fighting the FOIA release of information, especially cost data, of his office in Houston?
I used to live in the neighborhood next to Reeves’. Both neighborhoods are gated and there’s a short, public road between the neighborhood entrances and Lakeland Drive. It was always difficult to come out of the neighborhood and go west on Lakeland because of having to cross the lanes of eastbound traffic. The road expansion made it worse.
There was talk of a stoplight, but a) the traffic entering/exiting the neighborhoods didn’t warrant one, and b) no one really wants another stoplight on Lakeland, do they? Point being, it’s dangerous exiting those neighborhoods during high-traffic times of day (which include most of the day).
I know it’s a popular sentiment on here to say that those residents knew the risk and therefore should expect to risk their lives leaving their neighborhoods. Some of you JFP-ers and Jacksonians (to the extent there’s a difference) think many or most residents of those two neighborhoods deserve to die anyway. Most of us just wanted the best place we could find to raise our families and come home at the end of the day after treating cancer, teaching your kids, making sure your utilities work, training new doctors, etc.
I have no idea what Tate did or did not do in the hopes that a road would be built to connect the neighborhoods with the stoplight just west of the neighborhoods’ entrances. I do know from living there that there’s an absolute need for some kind of solution for the couple of hundred families in the two neighborhoods who just want safe ingress and egress from their homes.
So Reeves wanted to use state funds to get out of his driveway quicker?
If hood had had a prisoner shovel one scoop of gravel onto his private land Fox News would be here with live breaking news updates about the fraud and graft and greed!
Reeves got caught....and that’s a big deal to a “Christian” person.
Tate Leeves
New movie out this week:
“The Frontage Roads of Rankin County and The Man Who Loves Them”
Starring STate GReeves
I can’t get over that one of these dudes is our next governor.
Is not Jim Hood the chief law enforcement person in Mississippi? Hood must believe Reeves did not do any wrong since Hood did not prosecute. Contrary opinion would be that Mr. Hood did not do his job. Then, this report is a slap in Hood’s face not Reeves. Which ever way one views this, it does not speak well for Hood.
Tate lied about the existance of the 22 emails?
Nothing to see here, obviously.
All you Tater lovers should recognize what Kind of person he is in that Waller was chosen by those that know Reeves the best-his home county.
9:36pm - Read original articles when this was first reported by MDOT blowing the whistle on Reeves. A solution WAS proposed - a "J-Turn." However, this was not good enough and his office wanted a quick road to the nearest traffic light.
We in Jackson metro area are VERY clear on what happened here, and this is just one of the reasons he lost his own county, box and the metro area where he lives - twice.
#RepublicansforHood
Don’t be a snowflake. A politician tries to use political influence for personal gain? Welcome to every day.
If elected, Tate will embarrass MS.
Come on, put on latex gloves, hold your noses, and vote for Tater.
A vote for the Hood is a vote for gun restrictions, including but not limited to "red flag" extra-judicial firearms confiscations. Seriously.
How much public money did Hood spend on this investigation? Somebody should demand reimbursement from the Hood campaign. This smells just like DOJ, FBI, DNC, Obama and Hillary using public money to buy the Steele "dossier" on candidate Trump.
Same MSGOP establishment idiots dogging McDaniel voters in 2014 are now crying in their baby blankets and pouting a vote for Hood when they didn't get their way.
#PURGEtheRINOs
6:04am. Thank you. Yes, Definitely other options were presented, but they wanted a private roadway fully landscaped for two subdivisions.
Also, no one seems to ever mention that one of the subdivisions has a road that goes to the back of the subdivision that opens on Cooper Road. They could use this entrance and come out at red light on Lakeland if it is so difficult to get out on Lakeland.
He caused 5,000,000 to be spent on a boondoggle? Until he got busted and then lied about it!
What if his name was Rudy Reeves?
Everyone on this blog would be apoplectic
What a bunch of hypocrites
Well known in NEJax that Hosemann is one of major participants behind this Republicans for Hood (and Waller) push. Hosemann will be 80 in 2027 and he knows he's out of time age-wise. He wants a Hood win so he can run for Governor in 2023.
I ain't voting for either one of the sumbitches!! Many may say that I'm wasting my vote by writing in somebody else, but that's exactly what I'm going to do!!
Here's the real scandal: "That employee said, as McGrath has in the past, the entire Lakeland Drive widening project was pushed up the department’s priority list at the expense of other projects throughout the state."
So, did Hwy 49 South take a back seat to the expansion of Lakeland so that the Lt. Governor could get home quicker?
How about this don't choose to live down a road with 30 red lights between the interstate and your driveway and you wouldn't have to worry about the 30 minute drive home every day?
If the mental health lawsuit farce didn't scare people enough then this ought to do it. Jim Hood is using his office to go after his opponent for governor. This also isn't even close to the first time he has done this.
To sum up this report he allegedly had a statutory duty to bring a lawsuit to recover any monies. He then specifically alleges that Reeves' office as well as senators refused to provide documents. So instead of using the powers given to him under a mandate from the Mississippi Code he simply decides to cast innuendo of what could of possibly been found but wasn't.
His office conducted ten interviews yet didn't interview Mayor Rhodes, Alderman McDaniel, the Hogg Estate or anyone from the Oakridge or Dogwood Property Owners Associations.
There is no mention of any documents being requested from Mayor Rhodes, Alderman McDaniel, the Hogg Estate or Dogwood. Further, there is no mention that Oakridge first outright voted against the frontage road and it wasn't a result of any such failed negotiations. Oakridge didn't want the road and the only reason they even considered it was under threat of eminent domain and then due to the threat of a J-turn. There are no documents, communications or anything else that shows Oakridge started this or even wanted this. The assertion that Oakridge then pushed MDOT to enter into negotiations with other property owners such as Dogwood or pay for engineering reports simply not true and Hood conveniently didn't even ask for any documents that would have contradicted it. The residents of Oakridge are good people and Hood's callous and inaccurate mention of the capital, features and lots is nothing more than an attempt to paint them and Reeves in a bad light.
Jim Hood simply ignored seeking evidence from anyone that he felt might give any opinion or facts contrary to the narrative he wanted to push. He didn't bring any legal action because there was no legal action to bring. He conducted this farce of an investigation under his official office while simultaneously spouting jokes about a private driveway in his campaign speeches. Is it really a surprise that this is his conclusion?
Hosemann is one of major participants behind this Republicans for Hood (and Waller) push.
YUP.
So, Tate never put any pressure on Arnemann. But, Arnemann "felt" like Tate's pressure was implicit. Even the roadbuilders that pay Arnemann have to be shaking their heads at this total bucket of excrement that he and Melinda McGrath concocted.
@9:38 AM
The worst part is that Tate Reeves if from Florence so he knows how bad HWY 49 South gets during the rush hours!
Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!
JJ: Turn about being fairplay, maybe Tater should "investigate" Jim Hood's meeting with Dickie Scruggs' co-indictees, Steve Patterson and Tim Balducci. (See State Farm v. Jim Hood hearing in U.S. District Court in Natchez, MS.)
I despise Tate Reeves, BUT this is a chicken shit move by Hood. He had all of this ready to go before the primary's and could have released it a long time ago but knew he couldn't beat Waller. That tells me all I need to know. He is just like the rest of the democrats.
Oh, and his commercial about tailgates and not being bought by special interest groups, lets check out those campaign contributions. TONS of outside money pouring into Hood's camp.
Hood framing this as a driveway to a shopping center is rich. It was in the original plans and the project went over budget. It is a drive to connect to the light so that his neighborhood Oakridge as well as Dogwood could safely get out and across Lakeland heading west. This isn't about private access to a mall.
ALL of us who work in the Dogwood area and have to cross Lakeland at intersections without stoplights have a hard time crossing. What about us - can we have private drives financed by the State to get out of our office complexes? How dare Tate and his neighbors think they are better than the thousands who have to cross on a daily basis...
September 12, 2019 at 11:19 AM = Fake indignation
Lock him up!!!!
@ 7:50 pm
You said "Judges are appointed as nonpartisan individuals. The fact that a Republican Governor appointed an individual does not make that person representative of that party"....
Glad to know that you agree gubernatorial appointments aren't that big a deal. Repubs are out now proclaiming they can't have the evil Jim Hood making appointments - trying to convince repubs considering voting for the democrat (since there are supermajorities of Rs in the legislature to check what Jim Hood could do)
How cowardly said Tater tots, everything speaks for itself” how in the heck do you expect for your pittyfull accomplishments to be forgotten
Tater” Tots seems to simply ALWAYS want to blame someone else for “ HIS ” bullying backwards ass tactics...... oh and not forgetting to
mention the things that you say that didn’t happen in this report, well how about you Tater tots , putting out your own report of your accomplishments which will only show how you bullied the legislators to pass legislation that shouldn’t have even been considered. Talk about your sloppy tactics in following procedures and rules and laws... Tater” tots just simply put yourself on front street and stop pretending nothing “ EVER” happen in your environment ... YOUR environment... STOP running from the TRUTH....
Cynical Sam - please. Those who proclaim every Republican in this state should “hold their nose” and vote for the most incompetent republican candidate for governor in 20+ years is a Fox News lemming.
Use your brains people. Voting for Hood shows the republican establishment in this state that enough is enough of the rank and file candidates with zero original ideas or thoughts in their heads. Hood gets elected and has less power than his LT, likely Hosemann, or his supermajority republican legislature. The scary ghost stories of him single handily roughing through Pelosi ideals here are a farce. He is kept in check by Republicans, and honestly likely ends up working better with them anyways than a former Lieutenant who no one liked in his time in that office. Use your brains, people.
It had to be a difficult decision to run this investigation of his opponent during the campaign.
I’m glad Billy Ray Hood took the time to mull it over.
10:06 You mean 'mullet over'? Nice...
@9/12 - 8:49pm
I like your analysis if Hood is voted in. Hood is a DINO. He's a typical politician like any other MS politician. I would like a smaller grocery bill and better roads though. However, Hood would not have the chance to make MS liberal. No single political figure could do that to this state. Republicans dominate the whole of this state with the exception of majority black areas. We all know that majority black districts have not truly stopped Republicans from doing anything that they really want to do.
Long time Republican voter here.
Mr. Sam and others have precisely identified the problem for folks like me. I don't trust Mr. Reeves and, more importantly, do not respect him (voted for and contributed to Justice Waller's campaign), but I find I ask myself can I take a chance on voting for Mr. Hood just to make a point with the entrenched Republican party in our State? I just don't know what I am going to do. I am seriously frightened of "the Squad" getting a foothold in Mississippi.
What to do? Comments solicited.
That isn't an analysis at @8:47.
10:04am asked, "What to do? Comments solicited."
Jim Hood isn't a "national" Democrat ala Pelosi, Schumer, etc. and certainly not as extreme as "the Squad." Not even Bernie Sanders is that far left/nonsensical. For Reeves, the MSGOP, or their supporters to fear-monger that Hood would attempt to bring the pure nonsense of "the Squad" to Mississippi is dishonest; they and any person with the slightest amount of sense knows it simply isn't true. Many of Bernie Sanders' positions aren't shared by Hood and anyone with the slightest amount of sense knows that. Once you start getting into the more "center-left" Dem stuff, things get a bit more murky.
Would Hood support Medicare expansion? Um, well, probably so, since he has flat-out said that he generally supports it. SO did Waller, who was supported by quite a few GOPers. Does Hood support the state of Mississippi paying for the full healthcare of anyone and everyone who happens to be within its borders? Nothing he has ever said or done indicates that he would attempt it much less that he personally supports it and certainly nothing along the lines of Warren, Sanders or "the Squad."
On a personal level, does anyone really see Jim Hood and folks like "the Squad," Warren, Sanders or even Pelosi or Schumer sharing many interests, socially, politically or personally? Would they could get along if they were legislative colleagues? Probably, at least superficially and in public...well, sometimes, anyway. Does anyone really see Jim Hood joining "the Squad," socially, politically or ideologically? Of course not.
Even if Jimmy slipped a drive belt and suddenly lurched to the extreme left, the legislature would stop him. On the other hand, Reeves isn't a beloved figure with many legislators, past or present, so his bully pulpit is about half steer from the get-go.
As to who would be a better "national face of Mississippi," we're pretty well screwed on that one. Even if the winner actually does a good job for the citizens of their state, both are likely to cause the state and its citizens at least some moments of national embarrassment.
One big problem is that Hood makes some reasonable points, as does Reeves and as did Waller, but we are talking about the governor of Mississippi, which is a firmly divided state, especially along racial lines, into MSGOP and Mississippi-style Dems. Whichever of them wins, it isn't likely that state government will do what is best in the long run for the citizens, it will do what is best for itself and "friends and family" thereof. So, where does that leave a voter? With a very tough decision...unless you are the type to vote for a candidate for reasons that have nothing to do with common sense or reality.
If it matters, many folks I know who voted for Barbour, Bryant, and Trump voted for Waller in the primary and runoff and would have voted for him over Hood. Ominously for Tate, they would not look down on anyone who voted for Hood over Reeves and a fair number of them are making noises like they plan on voting for Hood, as a vote FOR Hood as well as one AGAINST Tate and the MSGOP. It is perhaps prophetic that all these MSGOPers who claim kinship with Trump don't want anyone to consider voting them out in the spirit of change, which is a large part of what got their hero elected in the first place. Hey, look at it like this: if Jimmy does get elected, it is unlikely that he could start a trade war with China.
Lastly and as a complete aside, Jimmy Hood is in a broad sense much more like Donald, Jr. and believe it or not, Jared and Ivanka, than Tate Reeves will ever be, so for the Trump supporters out there, I could easily envision Trump having (in context) a better relationship with Hood than Reeves. I can also envision Hood supporting Trump over Warren or Sanders should either become the Dem nominee, in which case Trump would not give a damn what letter came after Hood's name.
@10:04
Really, "The Squad"? How do they get a foothold in MS when the legislature is overwhelmingly Republican. Quit falling for the fear tactics.
HIGH wind alert @ 1:11 PM.
1:11 sez: "Many of Bernie Sanders' positions aren't shared by Hood..."
Well, now, isn't that comforting? That's like the doctor telling me, "It could be worse". So, being told by a liberal that Hood is not as bad as he could be - is supposed to encourage me to vote for him? Do you think we're third graders here?
Then, there's THIS, from the same poster, "Does Hood support the state of Mississippi paying for the full healthcare of anyone and everyone who happens to be within its borders? Nothing he has ever said or done indicates that he would."
So, telling me that Hood has not yet said he supports full (whatever) for all...is supposed to make me think he does not or would not support that? Another vapid attempt to trick me.
What 1:11 should have said, if he were honest, would be: "We're not sure how many of Bernie's ideas are shared by Hood and we have no idea what he thinks about benefits and entitlements for all because he's been careful not to mention it".
1:11PM, responding to, ahem, the probable 3:01AM troll...
Neither Reeves or Hood have stated specifically that they are against someone in a blue seersucker suit firing a 16 gauge Browning A5 with a full-choke 28" barrel loaded with Federal dove loads into a crowd watching a softball game played on a Wednesday night. So, by your "logic," their failure to do so must mean they would support someone doing it and anyone who points out that nothing either has ever said even hints they would support anyone doing it must be a dishonest shill attempting to trick you. If you are not a troll, you must lead a rather unfulfilling life.
1:11 PM (+ 5:23 PM) dropping 650+ words and your inflated sense of anonymous self-worth easily qualifies you as a boring bloviator and troll. Get over yourself.
Post a Comment