Secret CIA assessment says Russia intervened in election to help Trump win

stumbler · Feb 20, 2017

freespiritx said: ↑

Could this be construed as an indication of the White House colluding with Russia, by using
subterfuge to establish a gateway for Russia's eventual foothold, and calculated invasions into the Free World?
This begs the question!
To whom are Trump, and his administrations allegiances?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And this story is actually gaining more credibility and the people involved have already been caught changing their stories which is always a bad sign. And its also why Trump and his administration are now emphatically saying: "There was no contact between people in the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence during the campaign. That we know of."

But also don't forget. This story is making the connection between Paul Manford and his Russian sponsored work in Ukraine. And things like the Trump campaign getting any criticism or Russia's aggression in Ukraine deleted from the GOP platform.

But this whole connection gets stranger by the day. We've basically got VP Pence, Trump's Secretaries of the DoD and Department of State, taking hard stances against Russia and contradicting Trump. And then in Russia Trump is being mocked and angrily denounced as being too weak to actually follow through with better relations.

And now there is a new story out about Russia preparing a dossier on Trump's psychological makeup. And what is strange is surely every country does that. But this not only got leaked they have a Russian diplomat on the record confirming it. And nothing from Putin to deny it.

So there is definitely a big squeeze play already. And it can't just roll along. Throw in the FBI and congress investigations push is coming to shove now. And Trump is not going to be able to keep straddling the Russian fence. And whichever side of that fence he falls off of is going to be mighty interesting.

anon_de_plume · Feb 21, 2017

Come on, you libtards, don't you know that this is nothing more than sour grapes from losing a monumental landslide election!

Or...

This is nothing more than fake news disseminated by "so-called" journalists sourced by anonymous made up people!

Or...

This is another alternate set of facts that you know nothing about, so keep your clap-trap shut!

Or...

(Insert your inane, insane excuse here...)

shootersa · Feb 21, 2017

It's simple; consider the source.
Delete

anon_de_plume · Feb 21, 2017

shootersa said: ↑

It's simple; consider the source.
Delete
Click to expand...

Really? Clarise says we're not allowed to do that...

ace's n 8's · Feb 21, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

Absolutely. And this story is actually gaining more credibility and the people involved have already been caught changing their stories which is always a bad sign. And its also why Trump and his administration are now emphatically saying: "There was no contact between people in the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence during the campaign. That we know of."

But also don't forget. This story is making the connection between Paul Manford and his Russian sponsored work in Ukraine. And things like the Trump campaign getting any criticism or Russia's aggression in Ukraine deleted from the GOP platform.

But this whole connection gets stranger by the day. We've basically got VP Pence, Trump's Secretaries of the DoD and Department of State, taking hard stances against Russia and contradicting Trump. And then in Russia Trump is being mocked and angrily denounced as being too weak to actually follow through with better relations.

And now there is a new story out about Russia preparing a dossier on Trump's psychological makeup. And what is strange is surely every country does that. But this not only got leaked they have a Russian diplomat on the record confirming it. And nothing from Putin to deny it.

So there is definitely a big squeeze play already. And it can't just roll along. Throw in the FBI and congress investigations push is coming to shove now. And Trump is not going to be able to keep straddling the Russian fence. And whichever side of that fence he falls off of is going to be mighty interesting.
Click to expand...

1) Obama's Muslim ties.....http://therightscoop.com/former-dhs...to-scrub-records-of-muslims-with-terror-ties/

2) Clinton's Muslim Brotherhood ties...http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/03/29/hillary-clintons-muslim-brotherhood-problem/

3) Obama's domestic terrorist ties...https://www.thenewamerican.com/revi...ction-between-barack-obama-and-the-weathermen

4) Clinton's Russia ties... http://www.weeklystandard.com/hillarys-russia-connection/article/2004790

5) Obama's Russian ties...http://www.weeklystandard.com/obama...ection-i-have-more-flexibility/article/634473

6) More Clinton ties to Muslim brotherhood...http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2556

This is one hell of a shadow that you leftists need to hide.... It's a damn good thing that the ''Hillary is winning the election by a landslide''...was just more of that ''very fake news'' that was highly promoted prior to Clinton losing the election in a landslide.

stumbler · Feb 21, 2017

Once again I literally laugh when all someone can do when Trump is criticized is set their hair on fire and run around in circles hysterically screaming BUT OBAMA BUT HILLARY BUT OBAMA BUT HILLARY!!!

And I laugh even harder when they post long debunked lies. That is hilarious.

ace's n 8's · Feb 22, 2017

When I listen to Hannity on the ride home from work, the first 15 minutes of his show, is sound bites from the staterun leftist media bashing Trump, de-legitimizing Trump, scrutinizing Trump on all levels.

Hannity has started his radio show like that for the past week and a half, that I know of.

The funny thing about it is, I have not yet heard the same insult twice....they are all new insults from a variety of staterun leftist media personalities.

Trump gets criticized by the media on a daily basis, and only 5% of it is on policy, the remaining balance of the criticizing is on a personal level, combing his family into the mix.

For the past 16 years it has been Bush's fault, for the next 4 years, it will be Obama's fault.

Trump has publicly stated that ''WE HAVE INHERITED A MESS'',that did not need to be said, we already knew that, the country already knew that.

The leftists have lost 1200 seats nation wide since '10.

Seems you leftist are having a Chris Matthews moment on a daily basis, all I got to say, is, you mother fuckers get to enjoy the Chris Matthews moment for the next 4 years....

(yes, that last statement I made was a ribbin')

Oh...the only thing that is Hilarious, watching you leftists.

stumbler · Feb 22, 2017

We can tell how much the Trump supporters are panicked by the amount of time and effort they put in to trying to deflect from the fact that Trump's Russian connections are growing by the day and the stories people close to him and in his campaign are telling are coming unraveled.

Which is why the Trump supporters desperation is palpable.

stumbler · Feb 23, 2017

I didn’t think I’d ever leave the CIA. But because of Trump, I quit.

Nearly 15 years ago, I informed my skeptical father that I was pursuing a job with the Central Intelligence Agency. Among his many concerns was that others would never believe I had resigned from the agency when I sought my next job. “Once CIA, always CIA,” he said. But that didn’t give me pause. This wouldn’t be just my first real job, I thought then; it would be my career.

That changed when I formally resigned last week. Despite working proudly for Republican and Democratic presidents, I reluctantly concluded that I cannot in good faith serve this administration as an intelligence professional.

This was not a decision I made lightly. I sought out the CIA as a college student, convinced that it was the ideal place to serve my country and put an otherwise abstract international- relations degree to use. I wasn’t disappointed.

The CIA taught me new skills and exposed me to new cultures and countries. More important, it instilled in me a sense of mission and purpose. As an analyst, I became an expert in terrorist groups and traveled the world to help deter and disrupt attacks. The administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama took the CIA’s input seriously. There was no greater reward than having my analysis presented to the president and seeing it shape events. Intelligence informing policy — this is how the system is supposed to work. I saw that up close for the past three years at the White House, where I worked on loan from the CIA until last month.

As a candidate, Donald Trump’s rhetoric suggested that he intended to take a different approach. I watched in disbelief when, during the third presidential debate, Trump casually cast doubt on the high-confidence conclusion of our 17 intelligence agencies, released that month, that Russia was behind the hacking and release of election-related emails. On the campaign trail and even as president-elect, Trump routinely referred to the flawed 2002 assessment of Iraq’s weapons programs as proof that the CIA couldn’t be trusted — even though the intelligence community had long ago held itself to account for those mistakes and Trump himself supported the invasion of Iraq.

Trump’s actions in office have been even more disturbing. His visit to CIA headquarters on his first full day in office, an overture designed to repair relations, was undone by his ego and bluster. Standing in front of a memorial to the CIA’s fallen officers, he seemed to be addressing the cameras and reporters in the room, rather than the agency personnel in front of them, bragging about his inauguration crowd the previous day. Whether delusional or deceitful, these were not the remarks many of my colleagues and I wanted to hear from our new commander in chief. I couldn’t help but reflect on the stark contrast between the bombast of the new president and the quiet dedication of a mentor — a courageous, steadfast professional — who is memorialized on that wall. I know others at CIA felt similarly.

The final straw came late last month, when the White House issued a directive reorganizing the National Security Council, on whose staff I served from 2014 until earlier this year. Missing from the NSC’s principals committee were the CIA director and the director of national intelligence. Added to the roster: the president’s chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, who cut his teeth as a media champion of white nationalism.

The public outcry led the administration to reverse course and name the CIA director an NSC principal, but the White House’s inclination was clear. It has little need for intelligence professionals who, in speaking truth to power, might challenge the “America First” orthodoxy that sees Russia as an ally and Australia as a punching bag. That’s why the president’s trusted White House advisers, not career professionals, reportedly have final say over what intelligence reaches his desk.

To be clear, my decision had nothing to do with politics, and I would have been proud to again work under a Republican administration open to intelligence analysis. I served with conviction under President George W. Bush, some of whose policies I also found troubling, and I took part in programs that the Obama administration criticized and ended. As intelligence professionals, we’re taught to tune out politics. The river separating CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., from Washington might as well be a political moat. But this administration has flipped that dynamic on its head: The politicians are the ones tuning out the intelligence professionals.

The CIA will continue to serve important functions — including undertaking covert action and sharing information with close allies and partners around the globe. If this administration is serious about building trust with the intelligence community, however, it will require more than rallies at CIA headquarters or press statements. What intelligence professionals want most is to know that the fruits of their labor — sometimes at the risk of life or limb — are accorded due deference in the policymaking process.

Until that happens, President Trump and his team are doing another disservice to these dedicated men and women and the nation they proudly, if quietly, serve.
Click to expand...

ace's n 8's · Feb 23, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

We can tell how much the Trump supporters are panicked by the amount of time and effort they put in to trying to deflect from the fact that Trump's Russian connections are growing by the day and the stories people close to him and in his campaign are telling are coming unraveled.

Which is why the Trump supporters desperation is palpable.
Click to expand...

I myself have been waiting 6 WEEKS for that proof, proof that TRUMP/RUSSIA has ties.....still waiting.

ace's n 8's · Feb 23, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

I didn’t think I’d ever leave the CIA. But because of Trump, I quit.
Click to expand...

The man is entitled to quit his job, he claims it wasn't due to politics, yet, you and I know it was.

As I will also claim, this fella made his decision from propaganda....in short, he fucked up.

thinskin · Feb 23, 2017

The current investigation may ask for the Chump's tax returns but I would not hold your breath!

http://usuncut.com/news/republican-senator-says-shes-open-demanding-trumps-tax-returns/

Thinskin

stumbler · Feb 24, 2017

FBI refused White House request to knock down recent Trump-Russia stories, sources tell CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) — The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump’s associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN.

White House officials had sought the help of the bureau and other agencies investigating the Russia matter to say that the reports were wrong and that there had been no contacts, the officials said. The reports of the contacts were first published by The New York Times and CNN on February 14.

The direct communications between the White House and the FBI were unusual because of decade-old restrictions on such contacts. Such a request from the White House is a violation of procedures that limit communications with the FBI on pending investigations.

The discussions between the White House and the bureau began with FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus on the sidelines of a separate White House meeting the day after the stories were published, according to a U.S. law enforcement official.

The White House initially disputed that account, saying that McCabe called Priebus early that morning and said The New York Times story vastly overstates what the FBI knows about the contacts.

But a White House official later corrected their version of events to confirm what the law enforcement official described.

The same White House official said that Priebus later reached out again to McCabe and to FBI Director James Comey asking for the FBI to at least talk to reporters on background to dispute the stories. A law enforcement official says McCabe didn’t discuss aspects of the case but wouldn’t say exactly what McCabe told Priebus.

Comey rejected the request for the FBI to comment on the stories, according to sources, because the alleged communications between Trump associates and Russians known to US intelligence are the subject of an ongoing investigation.

The White House did issue its own denial, with Priebus calling The New York Times story “complete garbage.”

“The New York Times put out an article with no direct sources that said that the Trump campaign had constant contacts with Russian spies, basically, you know, some treasonous type of accusations. We have now all kinds of people looking into this. I can assure you and I have been approved to say this — that the top levels of the intelligence community have assured me that that story is not only inaccurate, but it’s grossly overstated and it was wrong. And there’s nothing to it,” Preibus said on “Fox News Sunday” last weekend.

CNN has previously reported that there was constant communication between high-level advisers to then-candidate Trump, Russian officials and other Russians known to US intelligence during the summer of 2016.

Several members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees tell CNN that the congressional investigations are continuing into those alleged Russian contacts with the Trump campaign, despite Priebus’ assertion that there is nothing to those reports.

It is uncertain what the committees will eventually find and whether any of the information will ever be declassified and publicly released. But the push to investigate further shows that Capitol Hill is digging deeper into areas that may not be comfortable for the White House.

The Trump administration’s efforts to press Comey run contrary to Justice Department procedure memos issued in 2007 and 2009 that limit direct communications on pending investigations between the White House and the FBI.

“Initial communications between the [Justice] Department and the White House concerning pending or contemplated criminal investigations or cases will involve only the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General, from the side of the Department, and the Counsel to the President, the Principal Deputy Counsel to the President, the President, or the Vice President from the side of the White House,” reads the 2009 memo.

The memos say the communication should only happen when it is important for the President’s duties and where appropriate from a law enforcement perspective.

A Department of Justice spokesman said Attorney General Jeff Sessions is reviewing the memos and that “the Department is following the guidelines in its communications with the White House.”

The White House and the FBI declined to comment publicly for this story.

The effort to refute the CNN and New York Times stories came as increasing numbers of congressional members were voicing concern about Russia’s efforts to influence individuals with ties to Trump.

On February 17, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence held a briefing with Comey. It’s unclear what was said, but senators suggested there was new information discussed about Russia.

“Every briefing we go through we gain new information,” said Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, a member of the committee. Lankford declined to be more specific about the briefing.

Sen. Angus King of Maine also declined to reveal what was discussed during the Comey briefing. In response to a question on Priebus’ strong denial of the claims, King said he was “surprised” that Priebus would be “that categorical.”

Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, a Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee, said the goal of his panel’s inquiry is to follow “leads wherever they go even if they may be uncomfortable to Republicans.”

“The American public will want to know if the President had personal or financial ties to the Russian government,” Swalwell said.
Click to expand...

shootersa · Feb 24, 2017

Trump needs to learn the correct procedure.
A president, or for that matter, a president elect or a candidate for president does not send lackeys to deliver messages to the FBI.

The correct procedure is to send the lackey to someone in Justice, ideally to meet "accidentally" on a tarmac with their private planes nose to nose.
And under no circumstance should matters of grave import be discussed. Only the showing of new pictures of grandkids and discussions of golf are permitted.

stumbler · Feb 24, 2017

Trump lawyer pushed pro-Russia deal for Ukraine, politician claims

Kiev, Ukraine (CNN)The setting was a Manhattan restaurant, and after 25 minutes what allegedly emerged was a pro-Russian peace plan for Ukraine that its author believes may have ended up in the White House.

In a CNN interview, Ukrainian lawmaker Andrii Artemenko said he discussed his left-field proposal for Ukraine in January with US President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, who offered to deliver the plan to the Trump administration.
The exact details of the plan are unclear, yet reports have suggested it revolves around leasing Crimea -- annexed by Russia from Ukraine in 2014 -- to Moscow for 50 to 100 years. In exchange, Russia would withdraw its troops from the separatist regions in Ukraine's war-torn east.
Artemenko declined to discuss the plan's details, yet hinted that a lease might be part of the idea.
The lawmaker says Cohen, who has long advised Trump, wanted to take the plan to Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser.
Any suggestion that the White House might consider a plan that formalizes Russia's control of Crimea would cause consternation in Kiev and among its allies in Europe. The White House has flatly denied any knowledge of the proposal.

In his interview with CNN, Artemenko shines a light on how a key Trump associate was allegedly prepared to push a controversial peace plan that might benefit Russia at a time when questions were being raised about the Trump's ties to that country.
The Ukrainian member of parliament told CNN he met Cohen through a mutual acquaintance, businessman Felix Sater, and that the three had dinner in a Manhattan hotel in January.
Cohen told CNN in a text message that although he had dinner with Artemenko, they never discussed peace in Ukraine. Other media organizations reported that he offered them a different account. The White House has denied that Cohen delivered any peace plan to Flynn.
Russia and Ukraine have since rejected the plan, and Artemenko has now become the subject of investigation for treason for suggesting it to Cohen.
In a hurried interview in a Kiev hotel, Artemenko said Cohen told him that Flynn -- who resigned in mid-February due to a controversy over calls with the Russian ambassador to the US -- was his best connection at the White House.
"Michael Flynn is the best person, the best of my connections in the Trump administration, who if he likes [it], it's going to [get] huge support, huge support," Cohen said, according to Artemenko.
That account was supported by Sater, who said the Ukraine deal was discussed at the January meeting attended by Cohen, Artemenko and himself. "I am always sympathetic and enthusiastic about peace," he told CNN via email. "Because it was a war situation, Mr. Cohen thought it was probably a National Security Advisor Flynn issue," he said.
Flynn did not respond to CNN's request for comment on this story.

Artemenko knew the proposal would be controversial as it undercuts both the US and Ukrainian diplomatic corps, and he says he knows it angered Kiev, who will have seen it as a pro-Russian proposal.
"That's why I feel pressure, and for sure today I can see people accusing me, and I see the prosecutor of Ukraine is trying to do something, to open a new case, to do an investigation about me," he told CNN.
He said of the January meeting that Sater invited Cohen to "a dinner in the hotel in Manhattan, and we probably spoke around 20-25 minutes, where I presented my intentions, my peace plan for the Ukraine, how we can stop the war, how we can stop the killing."
Artemenko said he had never dreamed that his proposal would be seen by the White House, but he claims Cohen said the plan had "great potential" and wanted to deliver it to the Trump administration.
"It was Michael Cohen's idea," he said. "He [Cohen] mentioned his name first in my meetings. And he said 'listen, Michael Flynn' -- from his personal opinion -- 'is most powerful man who can really support this idea, who can support, who can help you, who can provide this information to President Trump.'"
Flynn resigned 24 days into the job after misleading administration officials over his communications with the Russian ambassador to the US before Trump took office. Flynn made several calls to the ambassador in December, including some on the same day that the outgoing Obama administration placed fresh sanctions on Russia over alleged election meddling.
The Justice Department also warned the Trump administration in January that Flynn could be subject to Russian blackmail, a person familiar with the matter told CNN last month.

In a text message to CNN, Cohen denied delivering any documents to Flynn, and disputed Artemenko's recollection of their January conversation.
"If this continued fake news narrative wasn't so ridiculous, I would be angered. Despite the multitude of statements issued denying any nexus between Presidents Trump and [Russian President Vladimir Putin], the main stream media just keeps on trying to perpetuate this lie.
"I acknowledge that the brief meeting took place, but emphatically deny discussing this topic or delivering any documents to the White House and/or General Flynn; something I stated to the New York Times."
According to the Times, Cohen said he left a sealed envelope with the proposed peace plan in Flynn's office. Later, Cohen denied delivering a peace plan to Flynn.
Artemenko insists, however, that it was Cohen's idea to show the peace proposal to the senior White House official. "It was his idea, absolutely his idea," he said.
After Russia seized the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine in 2014, it sent military help to separatists in the country's east, where violent conflict over disputed territory drags on to this day.
Kiev has refused to discuss the official transfer of the peninsula to Russia, and dismissed Artemenko's plan as a result.
Moscow considers the peninsula already its territory, after its residents -- under a substantial Russian military presence -- voted in a 2014 referendum to join the Russian Federation.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov said Russia refuses to discuss the lease of a region it already controls: "How can Russia rent its own region? This question itself is absurd."

A White House spokesman offered this statement in response to CNN's request for comment: "No one in the White House -- including the President, Vice President and senior members of the NSC -- has spoken to Mr. Cohen about any Russia-Ukraine peace proposal, and no one has spoken to Andrii Artemenko at all about any matter.
"In addition, the NSC keeps comprehensive records of documents received, and we have no record of receiving any proposal from Mr. Cohen. This is another absurd, misleading attempt to distract from the real reform taking place under President Trump."
Artemenko left the interview with CNN to attend what he said was a meeting with the President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, although the presidential administration denied such a meeting took place.

Yet moments after leaving the interview, Ukrainian prosecutors announced he would be investigated for "treason" over the deal.
Click to expand...

ace's n 8's · Feb 25, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

FBI refused White House request to knock down recent Trump-Russia stories, sources tell CNN

Click to expand...

More flagrant horseshit.

The FBI went to the Administration and told the Administration that they have not found any evidence..nada..nothing...zilch, tieing Trump to Russia...FIRST

Then Spicer had asked them to tell the press that...

Nothing more, nothing less.

stumbler · Feb 25, 2017

I will tell you even if some paid for PR hacks are only getting paid a penny a post they are still overpaid if they think anyone is going to believe their convoluted bullshit.

And no, to my critics in advance, I do not as yet have a working definition of what "convoluted bullshit" actually is. But it appears this is a new subspecies of bullshit that needs to be submitted to the PFA for further study and peer review.

freespiritx · Feb 25, 2017

stumbler said: ↑

I will tell you even if some paid for PR hacks are only getting paid a penny a post they are still overpaid if they think anyone is going to believe their convoluted bullshit.

And no, to my critics in advance, I do not as yet have a working definition of what "convoluted bullshit" actually is. But it appears this is a new subspecies of bullshit that needs to be submitted to the PFA for further study and peer review.
Click to expand...

"Convoluted bullshit", [ Definition ] ...... A condition known to infect only those considered to be "extreme right wing supporters" of the president, including the infections of an individual named Trump, his advisers, and cabinet. All other humans have a pre-existing immunity to this disgusting condition. No known antidote!

shootersa · Feb 25, 2017

Keep it up.
You are doing a fine job.

clarise · Feb 25, 2017

anon_de_plume said: ↑

Really? Clarise says we're not allowed to do that [consider new story sources]...
Click to expand...

Sanity Is Relative said:

No she means to say that as long as the source agrees with her it cannot be ignored, but if it doesn't agree with her it's all fake news based on one sided conjecture devoid of reality.
Click to expand...

Very funny, but I have to ask: do you guys ever grow weary of your own crap?

Yesterday Trump said the media should abolish anonymous sources. I suppose that sounds like a good idea to you. If not, it's only because you disagree with every word out of his mouth, knee-jerk fashion, even if it is something you are saying yourselves. Because this is exactly what you're demanding.

Right?

Well, I have a surprise for you. I think Trump's statement about anonymous sources is moronic. I completely disagree with it.

Here's the thing: news sources should be protected. Otherwise they do not come out. When a source is "anonymous," all it means is that the person's identity is not revealed to YOU, the reader. This is for his/her own protection.

It only works if:

1. The journalist's editors are in on the secret (know and can verify the source's identity);
2. The information provided by the source is corroborated;
3. The information provided by the source is presented as is, not embellished.

In short, when the identity of a source is left out of a story, it must be done responsibly. Most importantly, the person must actually exist, and the editorial board that signs off on the story must need verification that the information presented in the story is credible.

To this day we don't know who leaked Watergate. But the Washington Post knew the identity of the source, and everything presented was corroborated. If not for anonymous sourcing, ,the story never would have broken.

I'm probably wasting my time here. Even Stumbler is "liking" the crap you are posting, and that sack of shit claims to have once been a journalist for a small paper. Either he was lying through his teeth, or he got canned with cause because he didn't understand his job, or chemicals have made him loopy.

As I say, this is a waste of time. So do carry on.

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

anon_de_plume Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

anon_de_plume Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

thinskin Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

freespiritx DreamWeaver

shootersa Frisky Feline

clarise Precious princess Banned!

Secret CIA assessment says Russia intervened in election to help Trump win

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

anon_de_plume Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

anon_de_plume Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

thinskin Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

freespiritx DreamWeaver

shootersa Frisky Feline

clarise Precious princess Banned!

Useful Searches