Russia Probe

Declassification of Carter Page Warrants May Be Politically Motivated, but More Transparency Is Still Good

Also, more text messages!

|

Carter Page
Sergei Karpukhin / Reuters

In the midst of a big fight about the fate of Supreme Court candidate Brett Kavanaugh due to surprise accusations of teen sexual misconduct, we also get this unrelated announcement from the White House this afternoon:

At the request of a number of committees of Congress, and for reasons of transparency, the President has directed the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice (including the FBI) to provide for the immediate declassification of the following materials: (1) pages 10-12 and 17-34 of the June 2017 application to the FISA court in the matter of Carter W. Page; (2) all FBI reports of interviews with Bruce G. Ohr prepared in connection with the Russia investigation; and (3) all FBI reports of interviews prepared in connection with all Carter Page FISA applications.

In addition, President Donald J. Trump has directed the Department of Justice (including the FBI) to publicly release all text messages relating to the Russia investigation, without redaction, of James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr.

Parts of the warrant approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to wiretap Page to try to determine the extent of his connections with the Russian government were released in July in a heavily redacted format. This order is obviously for the purpose of revealing even more information from both that application and text messages that the administration hopes will show that the investigation of Page and President Donald Trump's campaign in 2016 were driven by an ideological motivation to try to stop Trump from taking office.

This takes us into some pretty uncharted territories here: Just releasing parts of a FISA warrant was new ground; unredacting even more takes it all even further. It's still not a full release. The warrant application is 66 pages. What they're asking to be fully unredacted is all the information that they used to justify the wiretap request itself—the evidence and the conclusion. The second half of the warrant is full of procedural information about minimization (the process of protecting privileged information from disclosure) and details of the information being sought and are not included in the declassification order.

There is likely to be some groaning about threats to national security here with the potential exposure of sources and methods of snooping on Russia. While I'm skeptical about the timing and motives here, all along—indeed well before Trump came alongReason has called for more transparency on what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court does and for Americans to have more actual insight about what goes into the decision to allow secret wiretapping of American citizens. I am very much in favor of seeing more information being used to justify this investigation. We're talking about a criminal investigation into people connected to the president of the United States. This is not something that can remain a national secret. And it's worth a reminder here that thus far Page has not been charged with any crimes.

Today the Freedom of the Press Foundation published a memo from the Department of Justice showing the process of how investigators request wiretaps under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act targeting journalists, but we have no idea how frequently that happens or even if it's going on right now. This is not just about Trump or the people surrounding Trump. It's also about how much we're allowed to know about America's most secret of surveillance mechanisms.

UPDATE: A spokesperson from the Department of Justice explains what happens next:

DOJ
Department of Justice

NEXT: "I'm afraid you can't say that, Dave"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. In D.C., even a loose fart is politically motivated.

    1. No, teh loose ones come tumbling down both pants legs and are bipartisan. It’s the solid ones that have to choose left or right leg.

    2. Never trust a fart.

    3. Everything a politician does is politically motivated!? That can’t be true! Politicians are supposed to be pure as the driven snow! It says so right there in the Constitution someplace, I’m sure of it; right next to the place where it says everyone accused of rape is presumed guilty until proved innocent unless the accused is a Democrat!

      1. You do know that he wasn’t accused of rape, just sexual misconduct? Politicians are no different than you or me, they were just elected to an office where they are supposed to act responsibly. If you were in the same position you or I wouldn’t act much differently.

        Please show me where a democrat is presumed innocent of rape and I’ll show you just as many times as that’s been said about a republican.

        1. Please show me where a democrat is presumed innocent of rape and I’ll show you just as many times as that’s been said about a republican.

          So you’re going to show me where Republicans like Roy Moore and Brett Kavanaugh have been presumed innocent just as much as Democrats like Keith Ellison, Corey Booker, Tom Carper, Sherrod Brown, and (of course) Bill Clinton? You do also realize that according to the misandrists who go around making these blatantly false accusations, any form of “sexual misconduct” is rape? That’s how they come up with those ridiculous claims that, like, seven out of every five women in college have been raped: guy touches a gal’s knee and she doesn’t like that? Rape!

      2. You do know that he wasn’t accused of rape, just sexual misconduct? Politicians are no different than you or me, they were just elected to an office where they are supposed to act responsibly. If you were in the same position you or I wouldn’t act much differently.

        Please show me where a democrat is presumed innocent of rape and I’ll show you just as many times as that’s been said about a republican.

  2. The smoking gun appears!

  3. Except it is about Trump is his desperate need to distract from his own criminal liability. I want to know how Carter Page wound up as a top Trump campaign foreign policy advisor. Who picked Page?

    1. Who promoted Peress?

      Sorry, wrong scandal.

    2. More important, what foreign agent turned Page?

      1. Professor Plum. I never liked that egghead.

        1. I once drunkenly wrestled Miss Scarlet but couldn’t figure how to take her one-piece swimsuit off because she was wearing clothes over it. Then Colonel Mustard dog-piled us both and I forgot to complete the rape.

      2. Clearly it was some guy named Sergey, Alex Jones

    3. Who framed Roger Rabbit?

      1. Christopher Lloyd

    4. Horny lizard is trying to compete for level of ignorance it seems. If an invalid fisa is executed to spy on political opponents… You wouldn’t want to know? So far most of the doj/FBI redactions seem to be embarrassment related instead of national security.

      It’s weird watching democrats decry fisa and then defend it to its death because of but Trump.

      1. Then let’s see all the FISA warrants. Why stop at Carter Page’s?

        If your hypothesis is true, that a corrupt FBI is running around getting bogus warrants under false pretenses because they’re up to no good, then how many other bogus warrants do they have out there?

        1. Good point, release them all (But you don’t actually want that, do you).

        2. What makes you think I support FISA courts? I’d like every single warrant released with the most minimal redactions, true national security, released. Way to argue against windmills Jeff.

        3. THIS!! All the Obama ones as well.

          commiejeff finally gets one right.

      2. Carter Page claimed he was an informal adviser to tbe Kremlin. We know he had relationships with Russian spies and those spies contemplated recruiting him for mother Russia. That’s enough right there to warrant the closer look. Ya’ll are just fucking crazy to not see it for what it is.

        1. And we know Steele got information from the Kremlin, put it in the dossier, and that the dossier was used in part as justification for the FISA.

          What’s your point, again?

        2. Page had been surveilled earlier, and it was ended…until he joined Trump. Without credible new evidence, this is criminal.

        3. Does it hurt being that ignorant HL?
          Or just normal for a Progressive serf?

    5. He wasn’t a top advisor. Didn’t even SPEAK to Trump, per Page. He had spent years in Moscow with a former employer so he understood Russia and Trump’s proposal to improve relations with Russia and let them handle the Middle East was a smart one.

      1. He wasn’t a top advisor.

        Trump personally, publicly, expressly named Page as a foreign policy advisor to Trump.

        Other than that, great comment.

    6. What criminal liability?

      I was pretty skeptical about Trump as president. I didn’t think he’d follow through on what he said he would do. I thought he’d use the office to his own personal advantage and basically tell America to suck it.

      But Trump has done more good for American in ~500 days than the past four presidents did in 28 years. And without Trump, as bad as things were under Obozo, they’d be much (much) worse now. The turn-around from Obozo isn’t tiny, or minor. It’s about as dramatic as it could be. see https://youtu.be/qoIhgYtVQGU?t=143

      Opponents of Trump keep talking about his “criminal liability”. Well, let’s hear it. Put up, or shut up. What crimes has Trump committed? List them – or suck it.

      1. I was pretty skeptical about Trump as president. I didn’t think he’d follow through on what he said he would do. I thought he’d use the office to his own personal advantage and basically tell America to suck it.

        Looks to me like he kinda did both. I mean, self-interest and keeping campaign promises aren’t exactly mutually exclusive activities, as the Croats in Prolozac could tell you.

  4. Will the DOJ release the declassified papers? Or will they keep them hidden. Declassified does not guarantee public disclosure.

  5. Let’s see it all.

    1. Wait, are we talking about the FISA warrant or the Kavanaugh hearings?

      1. Would be interesting to see who has more verifiable facts, the doj/FBI on page or Ford. Ford has zero verifiable facts but the doj/FBI literally withheld facts of Russia thinking page was a useless asset… So I think 0 Trump’s a negative value. Ford wins?

  6. How can transparency be politically motivated? Did they forge the docs or is it still hard for you to accept that your publication trafficked in CIA talking points?

    1. There’s evidence questioning the legitimacy of the conspiracy theory than the conspiracy theory itself. Anti-war voices from both Left and Right denounced this conspiracy from the get go. While conservatives, like this publication, clung to respectable opinion

      1. While conservatives, like this publication,

        Please stop. This isn’t 1/10th as clever as you think.

        1. “This isn’t 1/10th as clever as you think.”

          It’s not the lack of cleverness that is annoying you, it’s the consistency and repetition. Which is substantially more powerful, and you know it.

          But, I’ll grant you it would be more accurate if he called them all reactionaries.

          Which is entirely the case as Reason abandons strong libertarian principles again and again because Trump

      2. “While conservatives, like this publication”
        Hahahahahahahahahahaha… whew lad.

        1. He’s using conservative in the literal sense – as in, maintaining the current progressive status quo.
          It’s accurate

          1. They tell us they are not leftists. they tell us they are libertarians. Yet that cannot be accurate given how often, and how quickly they abandon libertarian principles when the principals do not suit them.

            That leaves but one option remaining.

            1. They’re nouveau libertarian, I suppose. Right up there libertarians supporting things like the UBI and open borders, one might think.

            2. They are Progressive Libertarians; not much different from their Progressive Democrat and Progressive Republican tovarisch!

              1. Or in the words of that famous philosopher, Forrest Gump:
                Progressive is as Progressive does!

            3. They tell us they are not leftists. they tell us they are libertarians. Yet that cannot be accurate given how often, and how quickly they abandon libertarian principles when the principals do not suit them.

              That leaves but one option remaining.

              Specifically, that they are all Dave Weigel’s bisexual lovers.

    2. Even assuming Trump’s motives were bad – we can’t hang around waiting for people to do the right thing for the right reasons. It’s great enough that they did the right thing even for wrong reasons.

  7. Huh. I woulda expected this closer to the midterm elections.

  8. Does reason do nothing but cover Democrat conspiracies anymore?

    1. Agreed, how much shady shit are Dems up to that it’s so easy to find.

    2. Not nearly enough.
      American journalism means enthusiastically covering all the stories that reflect badly on the DNC …with a pillow …until they stop moving.

    3. Democrats dont have conspiracies, they have an ongoing and active criminal enterprise.

      1. As opposed to the steadfast, principled, patriotic Republican Party.

        (This was sarcasm.)

  9. It’s just so fucking stupid to believe this is about transparency but I guess you’ll find that out when it’s time to release the Mueller findings.

    1. What are yoi so afraid of?

      1. Nothing. It’s interesting to say the least watching Republicans attacking Republican law enforcement officers using Russian propaganda. Most of them are useful idiots but guys like Manafort and Gates know the score and it’s good to hear they’re now working for the United States govt.

        1. They were not “republican law enforcement”. I would have thought that would be obvious at this point.

          The fisa warrant is not prepared by career employees, but by political appointees. The political employees who prepared the fisa warrant were not republicans, that much is clearly obvious, given the fact the first warrant was drafted prior to Trump being president.

          1. Some of them are Republicans (E.G. Comey), but you might note that many Republicans also loathe Trump.

            1. Generally the evil RINO traitor type.

              1. ‘Bipartisanship’ is just the word we use for when the parties agree to do something both evil and stupid. Generally speaking, anyway. Occasionally they come together to do something good, but I’m having trouble coming up with a specific case.

        2. Definitely release all Mueller’s data. Now!!

    2. Well it is a matter of public record that Obama’s Justice Dept. used a unverified dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign to secure a FISA warrant to spy on a U.S. person who was connected to the Trump campaign. The Democrats and their allies in the Justice Dept. and FBI claim that the discredited dossier was only a small part of the evidence presented and that the redacted evidence will somehow implicate Trump, even though no actual crime is alleged. Trump is declassifying those portions of the warrant application so we will finally find out who’s telling the truth. If you’re correct you should be delighted. But I suspect you’ll be disappointed.

      1. ^ This. It should be interesting to see if anyone reports on it.

        1. They won’t have any choice but to report it.

          But the lamestream media will NOT be happy with what they see. Don’t expect them to go on for weeks about the ACTUAL criminal behavior of people like James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr.

          Page 6. Below the fold.

    3. You’re really scared, aren’t you.

      1. Lefties are real scared.

        When Tony and other Lefties are really scared, they do drugs and then come on here to maintain their narrative AND nerve.

        Its take balls of coke to maintain an ongoing criminal enterprise, that is the Democratic Party.

    4. You’re joking.

      Like Mueller isn’t going to make sure that everything he wants out doesn’t get out?

      The only stuff left behind will be things nobody cares about.

  10. Sources have already been shutting down because they don’t believe their identities are secure anymore. The “damage” is already done.

  11. Declassify all documents. No more government secrets. They are supposed to be working for us. Would you allow your employees to withhold information from you about what they are doing on the job?

    1. Yes. What they do in the company bathroom is entirely their business.

      1. You would take it there.

        1. Just wanted to see if you think workers shouldn’t have that right in addition to not having any other rights.

          1. I’d like to see if you’re ever gonna tell me where to escrow so we can finish this 10k bet you offered.

            1. TuIpa|9.17.18 @ 8:50PM|#
              “I’d like to see if you’re ever gonna tell me where to escrow so we can finish this 10k bet you offered.”

              Tony, like turd, is both stupid and dishonest. Fat chance you’re going to get Tony to man-up on that.
              Scumbags, both of them.

            2. Agree to meet Tony somewhere private then subdue him. I imagine brokering the sale of one of his kidneys will yield adequate compensation.

          2. You mean like the right to keep what they earn?

            1. Well now, let’s not go crazy.

      2. Wasn’t Tony just screaming about how all documents should be released when Booker was posing as Spartacus?
        It’s a good that there’s such a thing as double standards, or Tony wouldn’t have any at all.

        1. I just don’t think it’s the time to release everything but you should damn well know that when the investigating is over I want every piece of it released for public consumption and I guarantee you it’ll be Trump and the Republicans fighting the release.

          1. Well, if it comes to that, then fuck them.

            In the mean time, its your fellow Democrats blocking and bitching.

            1. Another reason there shouldn’t be democrats.

    2. Don’t look at me.|9.17.18 @ 7:50PM|#
      “Declassify all documents. No more government secrets. They are supposed to be working for us. Would you allow your employees to withhold information from you about what they are doing on the job?”

      The claim for secrecy is typically cast in ‘intelligence’ or ‘tech’ terms.
      The first I can understand; you can get people killed if you open the files and Putin finds he has US agents in his government (and I’m sure he does).
      Tech is harder to support; the Krauts had the drawings for the Norden bomb-sight in early ’42, but no bombers to use it. Stalin had the ‘secrets’ of the nukes by late ’44, there really were none other than the technical issues regarding the implosion weapon. At best (or worst) it speeded up the commie’s implosion weapon by two or three years.
      Not sure that made a material difference in the cold war. The commies were gonna crash regardless, and in spite of apologists showing up here to claim ‘it wasn’t commie-commie!’.

  12. “I totally screwed the pooch on that one guys. Like you’d see in an illegal video, only worse. I was, I wasn’t just in the backyard with it, I was in the kennel, in the doghouse, in the pet store, at the dog park?oh, man, was I ever at the dog park! I tell ya, I’ve got a lot of angry dog owners mad at me for that one. There’s, there’s a petition online, guys. Don’t?don’t sign it. Don’t sign it. But I just, yeah, I really screwed the pooch.”

  13. That’s a lot of texts. There’s like 40,000 just between Strzok and Lisa Page.

    Is there going to be anyone deranged interested enough to read and analyze all of them?

    Is this the sort of thing the government printing office will turn into a book? Imagine page after page of texts. Would each person get their own book our will all the texts be in one book? Perhaps interleaved in chronological order? By topic?

    1. “40,000 just between Strzok and Lisa Page”
      Wow, that’s a lot of collusion. I don’t think I hit that for total texts in a decade. Were they writing a novel on Trump or something?

      1. I didn’t get that many texts when I was courting my wife on the other side of the planet. And some months my phone bill was bigger than my mortgage payment.

        That said, texts are short, so, yeah, they’re all going to get read. Then the media will refuse to acknowledge the juicy ones.

  14. Good journalism! Do keep us posted…

    1. Yeah Reason is begrudgingly acknowledging a few details of what would be the biggest political scandal of the century if anyone besides Trump were president. And, to be sure, Trump is still a big poopy head and they’ll wait to see how the NYT spins it, before they decide whether or not to end their new romance with the independent deep state. This has been covered extensively at National Review. If you’re waiting for Reason to keep you posted you’re wasting your time.

  15. Reason logic:

    “Politically motivated” false sexual assault accusation: GOOD

    “Politically motivated” declassification of “politically motivated” criminal government conspiracy: BAD, but also kinda OK because we pretend to be libertarians and can’t wholly condemn it because even the dumbest fuckin’ endangered species civil libertarian-leftard would see right through us.

  16. Of course, the president releases information as it behooves him to do so. I’d do the same thing if I were staring at impeachment. I’d wait until the special counsel has made some kind of public disclosure, through official channels or otherwise, implicating some “progress” in the case against me, and I’d periodically counter that “progress” by revealing even more information that discredits the special counsel’s information.

    Why woudln’t the president handle the declassification of information that way when the press is hostile to him as can be and the Democratic House will likely impeach him after the midterms for the high crime of being Trump?

    Oh, and from where I’m standing, the score looks like this: Mueller doesn’t have anything but testimony from people who were convicted of a crime and evidence that was obtained by way of a warrant that never should have been issued.

    1. Relax, they’re not going to impeach Trump.

      The Democrats are running the exact same playbook that they ran in 2006: whip up their voters into believing Bush/Trump is the worst president ever who is guilty of all sorts of horrible terrible crimes that deserve impeachment, and then when they get power, don’t do jack squat about it.

      1. “then when they get power, don’t do jack squat about it.”

        Left – Right = 0

        Hihn was right all along!

    2. Even Bob Woodward spent two years digging up dirt on Trump and his new book barely mentions the Russians and collusion.

      1. Actually on the Hewitt show, Woodward says there was no evidence of collusion whatsoever. And that’s from a guy who was deliberately writing a hit piece.

        1. Bullshit, there was a secret Trump Tower meeting where collusion with the Russian govt was specifically proposed and did his crooked best to cover it up by lying and conspiring with others to lie about it. If Manafort is coming clean I can’t imagine how much dirt he has on Trump.

          1. Manafort is like Schrodinger’s cat, he both is and is not cooperating with Mueller in relation to Trump until we observe it? Do I have your view on this right, or are you saying that Manafort’s own statements in regard to Trump are lies or calculated on the part of Mueller?

            1. Lizard is writing progtard fan fiction.

    3. Ken Shultz|9.17.18 @ 10:59PM|#
      “Of course, the president releases information as it behooves him to do so. I’d do the same thing if I were staring at impeachment.”

      Uh, Ken? You think Steyer represents the mood of the population or even the congress?
      You need to get out more. Even in SF, impeachment is the cry of what is here considered the fringe.

      1. I think impeachment is practically a given if the Democrats take the House.

        If the Democrats take the House and Pelosi fails to impeach Trump, I suspect the Democrats in the House will replace her as Speaker. I don’t think anything less than impeachment is acceptable to the SJWs, BLM, LGBTQI+, immigration activists, feminists, and environmentalists who are running the Democratic party these days.

        Trump won’t be convicted by two-thirds of the senate, but I expect him to be impeached–if and when the Democrats take the House.

        Regardless, that’s certainly what Mueller is trying to do–get Trump impeached. And it’s reasonable for Trump (and his legal staff) to deal with declassifying information with that assumption in mind.

      2. P.S.

        “Pelosi warned Democrats earlier this year against pursuing impeachment efforts against Trump, saying it could hurt the party’s chances in the midterm elections.”

        http://thehill.com/homenews/ho…..epublicans

        If average Democrats aren’t pushing it at the moment, it’s because they don’t want it to hurt them in the midterms.

        Once they take the House, those concerns go away.

        1. To be fair, RINOs also want Trump gone.

          They just dont want to get booted out of office for getting caught undermining Trump.

        2. “If average Democrats aren’t pushing it at the moment, it’s because they don’t want it to hurt them in the midterms.

          Once they take the House, those concerns go away.”

          100% correct. They can’t get conviction, but they can hamstring Trump.

          1. “They can’t get conviction, but they can hamstring Trump.”

            At least attempt to hamstring him until the 2020 elections. If they actually do pass an impeachment vote then I expect that they will not only lose the House again in 2020 but quite possibly lose more in the Senate as well as the White House.

    4. I’d do the same thing if I were staring at impeachment

      But what if you were in Trump’s shoes, where they’ve spent years to get nothing?

  17. “his order is obviously for the purpose of revealing even more information from both that application and text messages that the administration hopes will show that the investigation of Page and President Donald Trump’s campaign in 2016 were driven by an ideological motivation to try to stop Trump from taking office.”

    There’s no “hopes” here, Trump will already know what’s in the application and text messages.

    By the way, the statement from DOJ really means, “We’re going to drag this out as long as humanly possible.”; There’s nothing to review, they have a direct order to release the documents without redaction. All they have to do is comply.

  18. In the midst of a big fight about the fate of Supreme Court candidate Brett Kavanaugh due to surprise accusations of teen sexual misconduct,

    There is nothing surprising about such accusations; Democrats make them predictably against almost every Republican male. And let’s not kid ourselves: this is both a short- and a long-term strategy: Democrats want to kill any Republican nomination and make the confirmation process so toxic for Republicans that it will be hard to find candidates.

    1. +1

    2. The public needs to wake up and understand that the de k rats are obsessed with the permanent Marxist takeover of America. That isn’t hyperbole. They don’t give a shit about elections, or the constitution.

      Eventually everyone has to make a choice, accept a far left socialist regime, or be willing to do something about it.

  19. Because of my incompetence and many negative manic personality traits, being a life long grifter, flimflam artist, philander, deadbeat, pathological proven serial liar and guilty, I am unable to not obstruct justice to try to save myself, Dirty Donny Trump.

    1. “Because of my incompetence and many negative manic personality traits, being a life long grifter, flimflam artist, philander, deadbeat, pathological proven serial liar and guilty, ”

      Why are you admitting those things about yourself? This isn’t a confessional.

    2. You’re voted off the island for telling the truth about yourself JRuss and blaming it on Trump.

    3. Letting other people read the documents you have already read is obstruction?

      Interesting legal theory you have there.

  20. What difference does it make if something is “politically motivated”? The people in Congress who uncovered Watergate were politically motivated. Edward Snowden was politically motivated. Any time you uncover wrong doing and want something done about it you are politcally motivated.

    1. Because “politically motivated” is the new Hitler; as in, Everyone I Don’t Like is Hitler. From now on, everything that’s fine with “Reason” writers unless Trump does it is to be considered politically motivated.

  21. The latest Dumb Donny stupidity results of the Manafort and Cohen flips. Thanks Dumb Donny for the guilty conscience admission and additional obstruction charge. History will not remember you as totally worthless, but as histories best bad example.

    1. You think declassifying information and releasing it to the public is “obstruction” and Trump is the dumb one. Keep telling yourself that pal.

    2. Does it hurt being that ignorant JRuss?
      Or just normal for a Progressive Plantation serf?

  22. And the latest news: The DOJ is refusing to follow the President’s order. They intend to redact the released documents despite being directly ordered to release them immediately without redactions.

    Time for firings, or else Trump will spend the rest of his term being ignored every time he issues an order.

    1. I’m sure the oh so libertarian writers here will be outraged to find an unelected bureaucracy thwarting the will of an elected official.

      1. That’s totally different when they do that to Trump because reasons; and by “reasons” the writers here mean “shut up!”

  23. Government transparency is not when you release classified information so a political ally might be able to escape conviction for a crime. It also brings up why was this classified in the 1st place.

    1. So releasing information isn’t transparency when someone you hypocrites hate does it for reasons you don’t like. Got it.

  24. The government will screw us over whenever possible. I’m a bit surprised that there is not more of a protest against the bastards.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.