AWESOME: Black L.A. Cop Schools Ferguson Protesters Who Try to Lecture Him On ‘Racism’


This is from Top Right News.

Liberal white college stupids  students  think they have all of the answers to help black people.

The liberals have all of the answers but do not know what the questions are.

They are the true racists because they are tellings blacks we know what is best for you.


An extraordinary thing happened when a bunch of White students protesting the Ferguson, Missouri Grand Jury decision actually tried to lecture a Black LAPD cop on racism.

They got owned.

The students confronted the cop outside the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD. One skull full of mush, a White woman, who identified herself as an UCLA student, demanded of the officer: “As a person of color, are you ashamed to be part of such a corrupt system?As a black man, have you ever experienced racism?”

Um, that would be a yes. He had grown up in Jackson, Mississippi during the Jim Crow era. One would think she would dismount her soapbox at that point, but she arrogantly dug in deeper.

She then tried to convince him that as a Black man, he was kept down by the White man, and as a result could never possibly succeed.

“Racism is a structure of power,” she insisted, using talking points no doubt gleaned from a liberal professor. “You are a black man. You are kept down by your race, even if you won’t accept itYou’re a black man. You’ll never reach the same pinnacle as a white man in this system, because you are black,” drawing applause from the brainwashed crowd.

Um, did she get the memo that we have a Black president? It’s hard to imagine a greater “pinnacle” than that. How about a billionaire named Oprah Winfrey. Ring a bell, ding-a-ling?

The officer then began an amazing Socratic line of questioning that completely exposed the true racism of these students — and the Left.






Nobody is coming to save and protect you – police motto misleading

Leave a comment

This is from Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership.

The left keeps squawking about Separation of Church and State.

Yet they advocate State sponsored Dial A Prayer aka call 911.

I have a home defense system aka Glock model 22 .40 cal.

How the police motto “to protect and serve” has mislead a generation.

By Anthony Veltri, July 31st, 2013.
Article Source

In 1963, the police motto “to protect and serve” was officially adopted by the Los Angeles Police Department. The motto has since been adopted by many departments across the nation. While many officers align with this motto as the aim and purpose of their profession, the fact is that this motto has contributed to a substantial gap between what the public perceives as the responsibility of public safety personnel and what an officer has a legal duty to protect.

In fact, what many citizens believe to be a police, fire and rescue personnel’s duty to “protect and serve” them is actually in direct conflict with the “public duty doctrine” which states: “absent a special relationship between the governmental entity and the injured individual, the governmental entity will not be liable for injury to an individual… the governmental entity owes a duty to the public in general.”

This unforgettable story highlights this misunderstanding in no uncertain terms. In conjunction with the associated court ruling, the video below spells out in no uncertain terms who the police are NOT responsible to protect. It is 13 minutes long, and I implore you to watch all of it.

As you watch this video, pay special attention to what the public perceives the police to be responsible for… Some of those interviewed even exhibit indignation that the question “would the NYPD come to your aid if you were attacked” was asked in the first place. Then watch what unfolds.

On Feb 12th of 2011, 42-year old Joseph Lozito was riding the subway in New York City when he was attacked by Maxim Gellman, a knife wielding madman who police had been on the lookout for in connection with a drug-fueled 28-hour killing spree. The two police officers who were in the same subway car as Lozito retreated into the locked motorman’s cabin and watched as Lozito was brutally attacked by Gellman. Lozito, a martial arts enthusiast, was able to subdue his attacker, but not before receiving several stab wounds. Once the attacker had been disarmed and subdued by Lozito, the two officers advanced from the locked motorman’s cabin to take over and arrest Gellman.

Lozito sued the NYPD in 2012 for injuries he received during the attack, claiming that the NYPD was negligent, as officers did nothing to help him and instead watched the attack. The case was recently dismissed by judge Margaret Chan because “no direct promises of protection were made to Mr. Lozito,” the police had “no special duty” to protect him. (check out the full story here).

Let’s hear that one more time… just to be clear… The police have no duty to protect an individual… just the public at large. I’m not arguing over the law here, my objective is to make as many people as possible aware of what the NYPD officer’s legal obligations were in this situation.

(JPFO’s book “911 and Die” – just 14.95 incl S&H, is the perfect explanation of why responsibility for protection of the self and loved ones, is down to you – and only you.)
What makes this so ironic and infuriating, is that politicians who time and time again act to remove, or strictly limit the right of the individual to protect themselves with firearms, tasers, pepper spray and the like will often cite statistics regarding the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement personnel to respond to “save you.” What they fail to mention, is that it matters not how “fast or efficient” an officer’s response time is, if they have no legal obligation to protect you, or intervene when they get there.

I’ll admit, when I sat through the lectures on negligence in my EMT and fire classes, I was taken aback when I learned how the moral code of conduct that a public safety official voluntarily assumes is quite different from concepts of duty and negligence as viewed from a legal perspective.

Once again, I must emphasize that while many public servants WILL be there to render aid, they will not likely be found negligent if they don’t.

In short, courts have ruled, time and time again, that police and emergency response personnel have no duty to protect, rescue or otherwise render aid to a specific individual, only to the public at large.

If a public safety official feels unsafe or fears for their safety, they can stand right there and do nothing as you are beaten, burn, or drown. I’m not saying that police, fire and rescue personnel don’t go above and beyond each and every day, but what is especially important to note is that in many instances, they DON’T have to.

What is even more important to be aware of is that there is an alarming trend in which many, departments choose to respond in ways that are least likely to expose them to lawsuits. What does this mean?

It means that many departmental policies are now written in such a way that often times prohibits or limits responders from actually responding… The department officials know that they can’t be sued for negligence as no “special relationship” exists, but they might get into hot water for taking extraordinary or heroic measures to “serve and protect”… so which do you think wins out…

I’m all for coming home safe at the end of the day, but policy written to protect an agency from litigation rather than to “protect the public at large” is becoming more commonplace… Don’t believe me? check this out:

Warren V District of Columbia it was found that police do not have a duty to provide police services to individuals, even if a dispatcher promises help to be on the way. “… despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police because no special relationship existed.

The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists.”

And chances are, you don’t have any “special relationship” with the police. But in case you were wondering what would constitute a “special relationship,” let me give you an example… In the train attack scenario described in this article, let’s say that after the assailant (Gellman) was handcuffed by police, passengers on the train decided to beat him.

Police would then have a duty to defend him, (yes the knife-wielding murderer), because the officers had taken him into custody and he was now their charge. If the NYPD officers stood idly by as the murderer was attacked, as they had when Mr. Lozito was, officers could be found negligent, because a “special relationship” existed between the police and the murderer as soon as he was detained.

If you take anything from this article, please let it be these two points:

1: It is important that each and every one of us understand that WE are ultimately responsible for our safety and for the safety of our family and loved ones. Police and fire may be there to help, but ultimately, it may be up to us, as individuals to render first aid, cpr, or defend our family from from criminals.

2: How we choose to react to this information is of paramount importance. I realize that many readers are already familiar with this information and its implications… To those readers, I would ask: What have you done to prepare yourself and your loved ones in the event that public safety does not respond as expected to a call for help…

For those readers for which this discussion of the “to protect and serve” motto is a new concept, I would ask, what will you do to prepare your family to deal with this paradigm shift? What this means for each of us is different… some may wish to take specialized training in first aid, others may wish to become proficient with a firearm…

I believe that many people will shake their heads with disbelief when reading this article and watching the associated video. I implore you: don’t take my word for it… use your favorite search engine and research it yourself. search for “do the police have a duty to protect.” Chances are, if you need help, the system will work as we expect it to, but please understand, we have seen that what the public expects and what you as an individual are actually entitled to when it comes to public safety response are two very different things. What will you do to bridge the gap?

Anthony is the author of Hurricane Katrina – A Journey of Hope, which recounts the work done by emergency search and rescue personnel in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. He has also served as a Branch Chief at the US Department of Homeland Security HQ where he led a team of professionals charged with protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure ranging from nuclear power plants to the Hoover Dam. Has its roots in several years of public and private sector work, as well as disaster relief work.


Feinstein and Boxer Ask Californians to Lay Down Their Weapons During Statewide Manhunt

Leave a comment

This is from The Palookaville Post.

Will Kalifornians ever realize they have two damned fools as U.S.Senators?

Sadly I feel they never realize their U.S.Senators are damned fools.

How many sheeple laid  down their weapons?


PP)- As an ex-Los Angeles police officer killed three people and went on a deadly shooting rampage in a vendetta to punish those he attributed for his firing, California Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer pleaded for calm, and asked both law enforcement and civilians to lay down their weapons.

1An intense manhunt  for Christopher Dorner that aroused fear across several states and Mexico focused late Thursday on Big Bear Lake, about 80 miles east of Los Angeles, where police found a burned-out pickup truck that belonged to the ex-military and former police officer Dorner.

Throughout the day, Senators Feinstein and Boxer made desperate pleas for their California constituents to turn in their guns and not confront the crazed gunman because this would be a perfect test of their anti-gun proposals.

“The Senators feel the best course of action is to remove all weapons from law enforcement and private citizens so no one else gets hurt,” said a Senate communications intern. “When the gunman realizes that nobody else is armed, he will lay down his weapons and turn himself in…. that’s just human nature.”

2“I will bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to Los Angeles Police Department officers, on or off duty,” said Dorner in his angry manifesto published online. The rant also claimed that: “Unfortunately, I will not be alive to see my name cleared. That’s what this is about, my name. A man is nothing without his name.”

Other California lawmakers chimed in on the Senators’ anti-gun stance with Los Angeles’ Democrat Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa saying disarmament was a good idea, except for public officials. Republicans thought the idea was just crazy.

“Feinstein and Boxer want everybody to go unarmed as a madman is running a round shooting people,” said a Riverside, CA. alderman. “If that is the truth… I’m never going to San Francisco again… something must be in the water to make them that insane.”

3Dorner, 33, had multiple weapons including a frivolously banned assault rifle, said Los Angeles police Chief Charlie Beck, who urged the suspect to surrender at an unusual press conference in an underground high security room where police were shaking in their boots.

“Of course he knows what he’s doing, we trained him. He was also a member of the Armed Forces,” he said. “It is extremely worrisome and scary.”

The Palookaville Post has learned that nearly 10,000-members of the LAPD were dispatched to protect more than 108 potential targets across the region on Thursday. The department also said that the federal government was in fact more dangerous than the lone suspect because their ideas of weapon confiscation can hurt millions of Americans over several generations.

Putting down their weapons is simply not an option for all legal gun owners. It is their Constitutional right and moral responsibility to protect their loved ones…. it should be obvious.

Ace Cub Reporter Jimmy Olsentwins

Police Shoot Innocents; The Media Doesn’t Seem To Care Much

Leave a comment

This is from Godfather Politics.

The conduct is questionable at the best, trigger happy at the worst.

While I am a huge supporter of all LEO‘s.

As I am a former Correctional Officer and I saw the scum LEO’s deal with.

I say we start at the Top and work down the beat cops to change to LAPD.

I know Christopher Dorner is was a murdering scumbag.

The Police need to know who and what they are shooting at.

After I posted on the homicidal cop, Christopher Dorner, I saw this story. The initial New York Times headline read, “L. A. Police Shoot Innocent People In Ex-Cop Manhunt.” But that was too rough on the police, it seems. So they have toned it down: “Massive Manhunt On for Ex-Cop Accused of Killing 3.”

Los Angeles officers guarding a ‘target’ named in the posting shot and wounded multiple people in Torrance who were in a pickup but were not involved, authorities said. The extent of their injuries was not released. It’s not clear if the target is a person or a location. The Daily Breeze in Torrance also reports ( that there was another police shooting nearby involving another pickup truck, but the driver wasn’t hurt. ‘We’re asking our officers to be extraordinarily cautious just as we’re asking the public to be extraordinarily cautious with this guy. He’s already demonstrated he has a propensity for shooting innocent people,’ said LAPD Cmdr. Andrew Smith.”

It sounds like the public needs “to be extraordinarily cautious with” the police who are out gunning for Dorner! Or maybe the public needs to issue a request for the police to “be extraordinarily cautious” about bystanders.

It now appears that there were two women in the truck delivering newspapers—a mother and adult daughter. The mother was shot twice in the back and is in ICU. She’s expected to live. The daughter cut her hand on shattered glass. They were extremely fortunate. You can see a larger picture of the shot up truck here. The police simply opened fire on the vehicle before seeing who was inside the cab. Then it happened again. Police in a nearby area were alerted about the truck and the alleged presence of Dorner in the area. When they saw a truck drive by, they opened fire. This time no one was hit with a bullet.

It may be that I haven’t witnessed enough media accounts, but it seems to me that the police are being treated as if they can do no wrong and virtually nothing is being said in sympathy to the victims. Watching this video, I was amazed at how casually the reporter simply commented, “They’ve lawyered up, and, safe to say, it’s probably the last time they’ll have to be delivering newspapers.”

When I was a pastor in the Seattle area, I had a young man visit my church who had received graphic death threats against him and his girlfriend. He acquired a shotgun for defense. Eventually he had a confrontation with the person who he thought had written the threatening letters. For just pointing the shotgun at this person, he was immediately jailed and the prosecutor threatened him with multiple felony charges so that he was looking in life imprisonment. The young man was wrong and reckless, but it blows my mind how much of a double-standard we have in our society.

What do you think would happen if a family feared a killer and then, using privately-owned weapons, shot up a truck moving down the street because it looked like one that was driven by the killer? You know Piers Morgan would be all over it! I doubt any reporter would say “it was a case of mistaken identity” if a private gun owner targeted a vehicle without checking who was inside.

The media were reporting that the police were “on high alert.” What does that mean? It means that the police were shooting at trucks that looked wrong, before they even checked who the driver was. I can sympathize with the police. I know they are in a stressful situation. But what makes them more trustworthy than the populace at large? What makes their “mistakes” so forgivable while those of private gun owners are evidence to the mainstream media that our gun rights need to be infringed more heavily by the police?

Accidents will happen with guns. By glossing over the accidents of some and trumpeting the accidents of others, the media perpetuates a war against free society and against the Second Amendment.

Read more:

Liberals Come Out in Support of Black Cop Killer

Leave a comment

This is from Godfather Politics.

 These damned foll liberals want us disarmed.

This murdering bum needs hunted down and killed like the animal he is.

Sadly he will be made into a hero for most of the black community.

The Communist News Network will try to make him a hero also.


Christopher Dorner is a cop killer. He has nearly shut down Los Angeles because no one knows what he’ll do next to whom. Dorner is black. This is important because liberal apologists are making excuses for Dorner’s killing spree because he’s black. Consider these unbelievable comments:

“One Facebook page is proclaiming Dorner for president. ‘We propose electing a man who could no longer sit idly by and watch as malicious tyrants abuse the innocent.’

“The description on ‘We Are All Chris Dorner’ chillingly says, ‘Yes, this is war.’

“Nearly 3,000 people like the page ‘I Support Christopher Jordan Dorner.’”

It’s no wonder that law-abiding citizens are concerned about having their Second Amendment rights abridged. There are crazy people out there who want to take vengeance on anybody because they consider themselves to be Chris Dorners.

It doesn’t matter how bad Dorner was treated or how much corruption there is in the Los Angeles Police Department, killing innocent people is not the answer.

Each day in the United States 4000 pre-born babies are murdered. There have been some pro-life activists who have taken the law into their own hands and killed abortion doctors. Paul Hill is the most infamous. Hill presented a very cogent rationale for killing abortion doctors, but it was the wrong approach.

How often did we hear liberals attack Hill’s methodology? But now that someone from their own worldview has justice issues, it’s a whole new ball game.

And it’s not just random nut jobs that are making excuses and offering support for this guy. CNN host Don Lemon explained how many people in minority communities “understand” what this cop killer is going through and offer a level of support

“But there are people, especially minorities, urban radio, especially African-Americans and Hispanics — this story shows that now, just like the O.J. Simpson story, just like the Rodney King story, that people… There is a distinct difference in this country the way people view race, the way people view news stories, the way we filter things, because there are people who support him. There are people who say, ‘I had a problem with my job. I had a problem with police officers’ — especially with stories that concern police officers. There are people with a general distrust of police officers, especially African-Americans and Hispanics. They believe that he had a beef, a legitimate beef, but now he’s gone off the deep end and he’s doing it the wrong way now.”

Killing people was Dorner’s only option? Dorner couldn’t have contacted Don Lemon at CNN and told his story to him? I’m sure CNN and every mainstream news outlet would love to have had a crack at bringing down one of America’s biggest police departments.

Dorner was fired in 2008. That was five years ago. Why have the media not picked up on the story? Lemon knew about the corruption in the LAPD before Dorner went on his killing spree. In the same interview, Lemon said:

“The LAPD historically has a problem with racism. [They] had a worse problem with racism years ago, especially 20 years ago when the Rodney King story happened and probably worse before that and then it was cleaned up.”

Well, if you knew about it, then why didn’t you report on it? Is it because LA is a bastion of liberalism? The hypocrisy of the Left is unbearable.

Read more:




LAPD Uses Defunct Rocket Launchers To Scare People Into Gun Control

Leave a comment

This is from Godfather Politics.


More fear mongering from the left.

The sad part of it the low information voters will believe this crap.



The recent gun buy-back program in L.A. allegedly yielded a pair of rocket launchers according to LAPD Chief Charlie Beck. Beck stated at a press conference, “Those are weapons of war, weapons of death. These are not hunting guns. These are not target guns…they have no place in our great city.” This announcement that the gun buy-back program was successful in getting these “weapons of death” off the streets provided for some scary headlines in mainstream media. The police department’s as well as the media’s desired reaction was obviously to scare people and to associate law-abiding gun owners with those “paranoid, white nazis” who want to wage war with the U.S. government.

It was working, but then it turned out that those rocket launchers were not any danger to anyone at all…unless they were used to hit someone over the head. These particular rocket launchers were one-use, AT-4 grenade launchers. After they’ve been used once, that’s it. They’re not capable of being used again. That’s how they’re designed. In fact, once they’re used, they’re even sold for cheap at military surplus stores or on eBay.

Breitbart reported that it got even better:

“But even more absurdly, at least one of the tubes was a training piece and never fired a grenade and never could have. It was a device used only for showing young soldiers what such a weapon looks like. It is a hands-on training tool that is 100% inert, un-fireable, safe as a plastic kid’s toy gun.”

Writing for Business Insider, Paul Szoldra, a former Marine, wrote,

“It is, quite literally, a long, green fiberglass tube that does nothing….The turn-in of these expended rockets is the equivalent of me picking up empty shell casings that have been fired, and maybe even the ammunition box they came in, and turning it in for a free gift card.”

So, was this just a setup to make fodder for news headlines that would further the establishment’s gun control agenda? Did the LAPD provide the “rocket launchers” themselves? Did they get them from a Hollywood production company that used them on movie sets as props? Or did some guy actually turn in the worthless pieces of plastic without the police chief knowing that they were defunct in exchange for $100 in taxpayer money? Either the media/police are trying to pull a fast one on us, or some guy pulled a fast one on them. Either way, the LAPD and media are showing their incompetence and utter desperation to justify gun control measures.

Breitbart also reported that the LAPD have tried pulling this publicity stunt before:

“Back in May, Beck again paraded before the media with a “rocket launcher” he claimed his department had received during a gun buyback program. That piece, too, was clearly marked “trainer” and was incapable of ever firing any rockets.”

And for the record, I don’t think there is anything wrong with someone owning a real rocket launcher. The more armed we are, the safer we are from government tyranny, which is why they want complete disarmament. They use the media under the guise of “news” to convince people to be afraid of guns and anyone who opposes a government overstepping its bounds. “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny,” said Jefferson.

Read more:


Occupy L.A.: 30 tons of debris left behind at City Hall tent city

Leave a comment


The article below is from the Los Angeles Times.
30 Tons of debris aand filth left behind.
The state run media would have you believe the are like the Tea Party.
Yet not one speck of rubbish was left behind at a Tea Party Rally.

Click here to see more photos.Sanitation officials said Wednesday that they expect to haul away 30 tons of debris from the Occupy L.A. encampment –- everything from clothing to heaps of garbage to oddball curiosities left behind by the protesters who lived at the City Hall tent city for two months.
Andrea Alarcon, president of the city Public Works board, said workers already have removed 25 tons of belongings from the City Hall park, all of it heading straight to a landfill.
Sanitation crews also have vacuumed up about 3,000 gallons of water that had washed into a catch basin in recent days and are testing it for hazardous materials, she said.
Occupy L.A.: Photos | Videos | 360° photos | Live webcam
The sheer volume of personal belongings left behind after the early morning Los Angeles Police Department raid has astonished city workers: books and CDs, luggage and boom boxes, mattresses and dining chairs, cellphones, electric razors, a small red guitar with its neck snapped –- all surrounded by dozens of collapsed and empty tents.

A steady flow of people stopped by the park Wednesday to take photos and video and watch workers in white hazmat suitsrake trash into neat piles.

As workers broke down tents and placed them in trash cans, Ramir Delgado, 25, snapped photos out of curiosity.
“It’s a shame how I see all trash around here,” he said. He pointed to his head. “People don’t understand that the freedom starts here in your mind.”
Delgado said he was disappointed in Occupy L.A.
 “You know why this is filthy and not clean is there isn’t leadership,” he said.
A few feet away, crews in the hazmat suits raked trash of discarded protest signs, nail polish and jars of peanut butter.
“This looks like pure anarchy,” Delgado said, adding, “in a Hollywood way.”
Donna Spurgeon, who snapped pictures on her phone, said she was surprised by the mural in the center of the south lawn.
“How did that get built” she asked of the structure that city officials built around an historic fountain, a structure protesters turned into an art piece.
“If you’re here to protest, don’t deface public property,” Spurgeon said.
She said the aftermath looked like a “little war zone, a little ghetto.”
Norman Schwartz, 76, a retired attorney from Calabasas, felt differently. He stopped by Wednesday afternoon to snap photos and suggested that the Occupy L.A. scene was a great lesson in democracy. He said he was sad to see the park so empty.
“There was no longer this wonderful thing going on,” he said. “It was just an empty, dirty park.”


Occupy L.A. receives offer to decamp

1 Comment


This is from the Los Angelese Times.
Use a fire hose on them to clean them up.
Then use something to kill the lice and fleas.
Then haul them off to jail for trespassing.

Protesters could get downtown office space and farmland if they leave City Hall.

Los Angeles officials have offered Occupy L.A. protesters a package of incentives that includes downtown office space and farmland in an attempt to persuade them to abandon their camp outside of City Hall, according to several demonstrators who have been in negotiations with the city.

The details of the proposal were revealed Monday during the demonstration’s nightly general assembly meeting by Jim Lafferty, an attorney with the National Lawyers Guild who has been advocating on behalf of the protest since it began seven weeks ago.

Lafferty said city officials have offered protesters a $1-a-year lease on a 10,000-square-foot office space near City Hall. He said officials also promised land elsewhere for protesters who wish to farm, as well as additional housing for the contingent of homeless people who joined the camp.

Photos: Occupy protests go global

A spokesman for the mayor would not comment on the proposal, saying only: “We are in negotiations with organizers of Occupy L.A.”

Los Angeles has been one of the most accommodating cities in the nation for its Occupy encampment.

Officials here said they do not want the demonstration to end violently and have steered away from police raids like those in New York, Oakland and other cities.

It is unclear whether the protesters will give up their camp.

The proposals were received with a mix of excitement, anger and disbelief among protesters, many of whom did not know that members of the camp were in negotiations with city officials.

“I don’t appreciate people appointing themselves to represent me, to represent us,” one woman called out during the assembly. “Who was in those meetings?”

“It’s divide and conquer,” another protester said.

Mario Brito, a protester who helped organize the demonstration and has been in the city meetings, said the office space could be an opportunity to expand the protest.

Protesters have begun organizing a general strike in Los Angeles.

But Brito told the crowd, “It’s not going to happen if we spend 90% of our time arguing about camp issues.”

Lafferty said he told city officials that protesters may not agree to the proposed exit strategy.

“I have made it clear that there are some people who would want to stay and others who want to take that offer,” he said, adding that the offer of office space will remain even if some “stay here and decide to get arrested.”

Lafferty, who said he talks regularly to Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck, said police “have said that the day is growing near when they will not allow the occupation in its present form to continue.”

After Lafferty announced the proposal, the protesters discussed it and other alternatives.

Protesters planned to meet again Tuesday to talk about their options.


%d bloggers like this: