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

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Can Hillary Clinton still win? Unlikely, but possible
Source: WKRN.com
URL Source: http://wkrn.com/2016/11/13/can-hill ... ill-win-unlikely-but-possible/
Published: Nov 13, 2016
Author: staff
Post Date: 2016-11-13 13:15:48 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 26852
Comments: 84

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) – Is there still a chance Hillary Clinton could win the presidency? Technically, yes.

There’s a petition online with over 3.5 million signatures as of Saturday evening, asking electors of the electoral college to cast their votes for Clinton instead of Donald Trump.

The petition’s creator Elijah Berg writes:

“If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine – which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!”

There is another petition online with about 1,000 signatures as of Saturday evening, urging the electoral college to confirm Trump as the president.

The petition’s creator writes:

“The Electoral system is the system that allows every state to make their vote heard. Without it; the populous dense, liberal, inner cities would decide the election every year. That’s not democracy, that’s a farce.”

The votes have been counted here in Ohio and Trump is the winner. It’s been a bitter pill for some to swallow and that’s why millions are urging state electors to change their minds when they meet in December to cast their votes.

But, an expert from the Ohio State University says don’t hold your breath.

Political science professor emeritus Paul Beck says while electors can choose to ignore how their state voted and instead vote for Clinton, it is very unlikely that they would. He says even if one or two electors went “rogue” it wouldn’t be enough to change the results.

“Could one or two of them not vote for Trump? I think that’s always possible,” he says. “I think it’s not likely and they would suffer the consequences of that, particularly if it changed the outcome of the election.”

Beck says electors will meet in their state capitols on December 19th and cast their votes. Right now, Trump is the projected winner with 290 electoral votes and Clinton with 228.

He says electors are not compelled to pick a particular candidate, but they are carefully chosen by the political parties and are usually already committed to voting a certain way.

“Every once in a while, maybe in a state like Ohio where some of the party leadership was not supporting Trump there could be somebody that goes rogue, but I really doubt that is going to happen and you don’t want to be in a position that you’re changing the result of an election by your single vote,” he says.

However, Beck says there is still a legitimate question on why the electoral college is the determining institution for the election rather than the popular vote.

“I don’t expect it to change in the future. It would require individual states that have small numbers of electoral votes to be able to go to the popular vote and they’re not going to want to do that. It dilutes the kind of influence that they have,” he says. “I think it is antiquated. It was a deal that was cut back in 1787. It was the price among other deals or compromises. It was the price we paid for our Constitution. On the other hand, changing it is difficult.”

For now, Beck says his best advice is to accept that the contest is over and watch for the announcement of cabinet positions.

“We need to deal with that,” he says. “There will be a new administration in Washington. We need to keep an eye, of course, on what they do.”


I recommend that you fine folks re-cork your bottles of champaigne. Here are the key dates:

November 8, 2016—Election Day

Registered voters cast their votes for President and Vice President. By doing so, they also help choose the electors who will represent their state in the Electoral College.

Mid-November through December 19, 2016

After the presidential election, the governor of your state prepares seven Certificates of Ascertainment. “As soon as practicable,” after the election results in your state are certified, the governor sends one of the Certificates of Ascertainment to the Archivist.

Certificates of Ascertainment should be sent to the Archivist no later than the meeting of the electors in December. However, federal law sets no penalty for missing the deadline.

The remaining six Certificates of Ascertainment are held for use at the meeting of the Electors in December.

December 13, 2016

States must make final decisions in any controversies over the appointment of their electors at least six days before the meeting of the Electors. This is so their electoral votes will be presumed valid when presented to Congress.

Decisions by states’ courts are conclusive, if decided under laws enacted before Election Day.

December 19, 2016

The Electors meet in their state and vote for President and Vice President on separate ballots. The electors record their votes on six “Certificates of Vote,” which are paired with the six remaining Certificates of Ascertainment.

The electors sign, seal, and certify six sets of electoral votes. A set of electoral votes consists of one Certificate of Ascertainment and one Certificate of Vote. These are distributed immediately as follows:

one set to the President of the Senate (the Vice President) for the official count of the electoral votes in January; two packages to the Secretary of State in the state where the electors met—one is an archival set that becomes part of the public record of the Secretary of State's office and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; two packages to the Archivist—one is an archival set that becomes part of the permanent collection at the National Archives and Records Administration and the other is a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes; and one set to the presiding judge in the district where the Electors met—this is also a reserve set that is subject to the call of the President of the Senate to replace missing or incomplete electoral votes.

December 28, 2016

Electoral votes (the Certificates of Vote) must be received by the President of the Senate and the Archivist no later than nine days after the meeting of the electors. States face no legal penalty for failure to comply.

If votes are lost or delayed, the Archivist may take extraordinary measures to retrieve duplicate originals.

On or Before January 3, 2017

The Archivist and/or representatives from the Office of the Federal Register meet with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House in late December or early January. This is, in part, a ceremonial occasion. Informal meetings may take place earlier.

January 6, 2017

The Congress meets in joint session to count the electoral votes. Congress may pass a law to change this date.

The Vice President, as President of the Senate, presides over the count and announces the results of the Electoral College vote. The President of the Senate then declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.

If a State submits conflicting sets of electoral votes to Congress, the two Houses acting concurrently may accept or reject the votes. If they do not concur, the votes of the electors certified by the Governor of the State on the Certificate of Ascertainment would be counted in Congress.

If no Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution provides for the House of Representatives to decide the Presidential election. If necessary the House would elect the President by majority vote, choosing from the three candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each state having one vote.

If no Vice Presidential candidate wins 270 or more electoral votes, a majority, the 12th Amendment provides for the Senate to elect the Vice President. If necessary, the Senate would elect the Vice President by majority vote, choosing from the two candidates who received the greatest number of electoral votes. The vote would be taken by state, with each Senator having one vote.

If any objections to the Electoral College vote are made, they must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If objections are presented, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider their merits under procedures set out in federal law.

January 20, 2017 at Noon—Inauguration Day

The President-elect takes the Oath of Office and becomes the President of the United States.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-44) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#45. To: GrandIsland (#44)

BIG fuckin' deal. Once he saddles up and is in office, he will change like all Presidents before him. He will become absorbed into the bureacracy forever, speaking for meaningless, do-nothing, phantastick bobble-heads. He won't lead us anywhere but off the cliff.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   8:36:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: buckeroo (#43)

If you STUPID fucks think that TRUMP will fix things OR do things to your liking,

He has ALREADY started....the first two people he selected to work for him in the WH has my FULL approval!

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   8:43:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Gatlin (#46)

And?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   8:45:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: buckeroo (#45)

You cannot face reality....Trump has already started. The wheels of change for improvement were set into motion the day he announced his candicacy.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   8:48:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: buckeroo (#47)

And?

And there will be more.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   8:49:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: buckeroo (#45)

BIG fuckin' deal.

You finally got something right....Trump's presidency is A BIG FUCKIN' DEAL!

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   8:50:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Gatlin (#48)

Get off the crackpipe NOW! Just because Trump sez "dis or dat" doesn't mean anything. Just because Trump shifts a few people into his cabinet also, doesn't mean anything.

You have to quit taking your political pills and quit smokin' the crackpipe.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   8:51:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: buckeroo (#51)

Trump is on a roll....get outta the way or your drug savaged body will get run over.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   8:56:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: Gatlin (#52)

Trump can't perform 90% of his campaign promises. You didn't just take his "pill," you snorted it.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   9:01:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: buckeroo (#53)

Trump can't perform 90% of his campaign promises.

Your prognostications have an extremely bad record of being proben wrong....no reason to believe yours will not be wrong againthis time.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   10:01:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: Gatlin (#54)

America has been on a downhill slope since WW2. That isn't a "prognostication" it is simply examining history. Trump's, "Make America GREAT again" slogan can only work if America goes into WW3, similar to WW2 which was the zenith of American wealth and greatness.

The model can not be changed.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   10:14:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: buckeroo (#10)

"What makes you think he won't further pay some money to sympathetic electors"

He'd have to pay off 38 electors. What are the odds he could do that without being caught and sentenced to prison?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-11-14   10:24:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: misterwhite (#56)

You tell me. What were the odds that a US Secretary of State could sell her position to foreign governments while collecting millions of dollars for her, "foundation?"

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   11:16:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: buckeroo (#55)

America has been on a downhill slope since WW2.

This is true.

rlk  posted on  2016-11-14   11:19:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: buckeroo (#57)

You tell me. What were the odds that a US Secretary of State could sell her position to foreign governments while collecting millions of dollars for her, "foundation?"

She did it and got away with it.

rlk  posted on  2016-11-14   11:26:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: rlk (#59)

She did it and got away with it.

I don't think she did. The FBI has a team in Little Rock, Arkansas investigating her "foundation" right now. Strangely, the team was initiated on November 8th, 2016 .... otherwise known as "election day."

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   11:44:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: buckeroo (#55)

America has been on a downhill slope since WW2. That isn't a "prognostication" it is simply examining history.

You are right, that isn’t a "prognostication" it is your personal biased bullshit opinion.

Instead of trying to simply examine history through the eyes of Buckeroo….let’s see what a polling sample of Americans feel.

Oh, I just happen to have one available.

Donald Trump has made “Make America Great Again!” his campaign slogan, so we wanted to know just when his supporters — and all Americans for that matter — thought their country was at its greatest. A survey from the digital media and polling company Morning Consult asked a sample of Americans for their take on the greatest year.

The survey found that, across all demographic groups, the year 2000 was the most popular choice for the greatest.

Republicans tended to pick years in the 1950s and 1980s. Democrats tended to pick years in the 1990s, or close to today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/30/upshot/readers-pick-americas- greatest-year.html?_r=0.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   11:53:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: Gatlin (#61)

tater - using the NYTimes as a reference to substantiate any of your BS is proof positive that you are one stupid asshole. Speaking of assholes, have you kissed yukon's ass today?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   12:05:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: buckeroo (#62)

tater - using the NYTimes as a reference to substantiate any of your BS is proof positive that you are one stupid asshole.

Bucky, you have such biased preformed opinions that you wouldn’t believe anything even if it were written on two tablets on Mount Sinai.

You are such a dumb shit. I have never believed in abortion, but I would have given it some serious thought in your case.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   12:37:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: buckeroo (#60)

Strangely, the team was initiated on November 8th, 2016 .... otherwise known as "election day."

Source?

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   12:37:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: Gatlin (#63)

... you wouldn’t believe anything even if it were written on two tablets on Mount Sinai.

Oh no! Isn't your example, above, considered a myth or a faeble from a bunch of sheep herders?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   12:44:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: Gatlin (#64)

Source?

Why should I source anything for you, tater? Don't you have capability to LQQK for data on your own, using your whiz wand on your 'puter?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   12:52:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: buckeroo (#66)

Why should I source anything for you, tater?

Because you lie and just make things up....like you did this time.

So, I will just chalk this off as ANOTHER of your lies.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   13:51:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: buckeroo (#0)

Congress still has to certify the election results on January 6, 2017 . U.S. Code, Title 3, Chapter 1, Article 15; the U.S. Congress meets to approve the Electoral College vote.

Evita would need too many faithless electors .Only 31 states allow electors to go faithless without penalty .

In bridge, you have wild cards called trump cards. The trump cards are really wild because they change from hand to hand, depending on the bidding.

tomder55  posted on  2016-11-14   14:23:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: Gatlin (#67)

How much of your $300 bucks a month "government welfare" can you spare on a wager?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   15:25:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: tomder55 (#68)

Evita would need too many faithless electors .Only 31 states allow electors to go faithless without penalty .

So, you agree there is a possibility. Not much more to say.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   15:52:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: buckeroo (#69)

I have caught you lying, so there is no way I will trust you to pay off a wager.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   16:01:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: Gatlin, A K A Stone (#71)

Please don't quibble.

How much do you want to wager AGAINST my earlier statement that the FBI is investigating the Clinton Foundation and that it was initiated on or near November 8, 2016?

Got bucks? I do. The loser of the wager donates to Stone's website maintenance budget.

buckeroo

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   16:09:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: buckeroo, tomder55 (#70)

Evita would need too many faithless electors .Only 31 states allow electors to go faithless without penalty .

So, you agree there is a possibility. Not much more to say.

Oh, but there is lots more to say when you consider possibility versus probability.

Just because something is possible does not mean that it is very probable.

There is a possibility you can win the lottery, but the probability is extremely low and if you don’t buy a ticket….it will not happen.

There is a possibility that enough faithless electors can change the election results, but if not one of them is considering doing that or have said they will do that….then it will not happen.

Research finds that electors on the losing side are more likely to consider defecting, which does not bode well for those looking to oust Trump.

Sorry, Buckoo, but blocking Trump in Electoral College is mission impossible.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   16:23:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: buckeroo (#72) (Edited)

I said I have PROVEN you to be a liar, right here on LF.

Therefore, I will not wager with a LIAR.

The article on the probe dated November 8, 2016, states:

FBI agents across the country are continuing to actively pursue a broad political corruption investigation of the Clinton Foundation, ...

It does not state starting/beginning on November 8, 2016 ..

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   16:25:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: Gatlin (#73)

You are full of shit, as always. As I said, there is a possibility and not a probability of any constitutional issue. Why don't you go out back and shank some potatoe skins to dust off your delirium tremens?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   16:35:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: Gatlin (#74)

I stated the investigation was initiated in Little Rock, Arkansas on November 8 2016. Now, you want to puke all over it because you sat back drinkin' your moonshine again.

OK, don't wager with me. I could give a rat's ass.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   16:39:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#77. To: Gatlin, buckeroo (#74)

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/by-the-way-the-fbi-was-investigating-the-clinton-foundation.html

By the Way, the FBI Was Investigating the Clinton Foundation Too

By Margaret Hartmann
New Yorker
October 31, 2016 4:07 a.m.

[excerpt]

Fourteen paragraphs into a report on the internal feuding between the FBI and the Justice Department over the Clinton email probe, The Wall Street Journal mentions that the bureau has been investigating the Clinton Foundation.

It appears the probe was in its preliminary stages, and while some at the FBI wanted to launch a more robust investigation into allegations that the charity provided improper favors or political access to donors, the Justice Department’s public integrity unit said there was not enough evidence to move forward with the case.

“We are not aware of any investigation into the Foundation by the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, or any United States Attorney’s Office and we have not received a subpoena from any of those agencies,” the Clinton Foundation told the Washington Post on Sunday.

However, according to the Journal, FBI field offices in New York, Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and Little Rock have been collecting information on the charity for more than a year. The New York office did the most work on the case, with help from Little Rock. The L.A. office picked up information about the foundation in an unrelated public-corruption case, and D.C. was looking at the charity as part of its ongoing investigation into Virginia governor Terry McAuliffe, who is a former Clinton Foundation board member.

FBI officials presented their findings to the Justice Department in February, seeking approval to step up their investigation. Per the Foundation:

By all accounts, the meeting didn’t go well.

Some said that is because the FBI didn’t present compelling evidence to justify more aggressive pursuit of the Clinton Foundation, and that the career anticorruption prosecutors in the room simply believed it wasn’t a very strong case. Others said that from the start, the Justice Department officials were stern, icy and dismissive of the case.

“That was one of the weirdest meetings I’ve ever been to,” one participant told others afterward, according to people familiar with the matter.

FBI agents continued probing the foundation using methods that did not require Justice Department approval. A source says that when a Justice Department official caught wind of this, he complained to Andrew McCabe, the bureau’s second-in-command. McCabe pushed back, and some say that after the call he reiterated his instructions for FBI agents to continue looking into the foundation. However, some lower-level FBI operatives claim they were instructed to “stand down.”

nolu chan  posted on  2016-11-14   16:55:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#78. To: nolu chan (#77)

However, some lower-level FBI operatives claim they were instructed to “stand down.”

You better believe it. The fix is in.

rlk  posted on  2016-11-14   17:59:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#79. To: buckeroo (#76)

OK, don't wager with me. I could give a rat's ass.

I don't wager with LIARS.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   18:26:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#80. To: Gatlin (#39)

I don’t understand what you mean when you say enough delegates to the Dim convention changed their votes to get JFK the Dim nomination?

Delegates that were pledged to vote for other candidates were instead convinced to vote for him to get the Dim nomination.

BOYCOTT PAYPAL AND CLOSE YOUR PP ACCOUNTS NOW! ENCOURAGE OTHERS TO DO SO,TOO!

ISLAM MEANS SUBMISSION!

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

American Indians had open borders. Look at how well that worked out for them.

sneakypete  posted on  2016-11-14   18:50:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#81. To: Gatlin (#79)

I don't wager with LIARS.

Of course you won't wager with me. It is not that I am a liar; it is because you already know that YOU are a LOSER.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   19:28:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#82. To: buckeroo (#81)

I don't wager with a proven LIAR.

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   21:12:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: Gatlin (#82) (Edited)

Proof? Where is the substantive support this tyme, tater? With the tooth faerie?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-11-14   21:15:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#84. To: buckeroo (#83)

I don't wager with a proven LIAR.

Proof?

Proof ofwhat....that I don't wager with a proven LIAR, or proof that you are a proven LIAR?

Gatlin  posted on  2016-11-14   21:26:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

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

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com