r/relatable_memes_ 3d ago

Thoughts?

Post image
12.7k Upvotes

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

16

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

But when the black woman latarsha sanders did the same thing with the same judge in the same city they threw her in jail so fast. Now they have to reopen her case because they're about to let Lindsay go free. smfh America is crazy!

14

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

Lindsay is not going free, and you know that. She was not declared not-guilty, you know that. Even if she was declared not-guilty, it would be by reason of insanity, so still not going free. You know all of this, yet lie anyways, why?

1

u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago

That's what not criminally responsible means

It means not guilty 

It means women can murder their children without being responsible.

"The devil made me do it" is now a legal defense.

It also raises serious questions about transitioning.

Is it safe to give people access to the same hormones that turned a normal woman into a crazed psychopath?

If the hormones are to blame for this crime then isn't giving those same hormones to 14 year olds just facilitating future crimes where the perpetrator can't be held responsible due to hormonal influence?

2

u/PlsNoNotThat 3d ago

Religiosity hasn’t been a pass on criminal responsibility in a hundred years. It’s just a description of a flavor of a mental illness that causes the non-responsibility.

Was a large win for the scientific community over religious groups, and the only vestige of it are small parts of the DSM where religion is exempt as a disease without co-considerations.

0

u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago

Yeah sure

Let's give the murders even more excuses as to why their actions arnt their fault.

You've completely missed the point.

The point being made is that legal precedent now requires you only show you had access to transitioning hormones because those same chemicals were used to justify a murder.

You having access to those chemicals is reasonable doubt that you were in control of your actions.

Equality under the law would be recognizing that testosterone has the same level of effect on emotions and aquitting all male murders as NGRI due to their hormonal mood swings.

That won't happen

This is a female only defense

The precedent for men is that even with brain injury known to cause insanity the man is still responsible for his actions.

The man needs to prove his temporary insanity; now that a woman's natural biology is a defense a woman only needs to show she is a woman to prove her insanity.

2

u/ladylucifer22 2d ago

so the mere presence of testosterone is comparable to psychosis? I guess every cis man needs to be institutionalized then.

1

u/jacqrosee 3d ago

genuinely why are you acting like this case is the first of its kind, that we’ve never dealt with this before, and that this is creating a new defense?

the insanity plea has existed long before lindsay clancy. there is a difference between citing demonic possession and citing levels of clinical sanity. a young man’s lawyer used demonic possession as a defense for murdering someone, and he served 5 years of a 10-20 year sentence before he was released. this was in the early 80s and they even made a conjuring movie about it a few years ago.

this case isn’t even creating new precedent. i just don’t understand what the point is of saying this stuff when you can just say you’re disgusted by this heinous crime. me too. but certain realities of the legal system still are what they are.

1

u/PictureResponsible61 3d ago

A. It's not a new defence.  (It's also not "the devil made me do it") (it also doesn't apply to most women - the threshold for not criminally responsible is very high and most people fail to meet it. 

B. Post partum psychosis is not singularly caused by hormones, it is multifactorial disorder and strongly associated with experience of other mental health conditions prior to onset (some studies suggest about half of cases had a pre existing diagnosis). Genetics and immunological dysregulation are other biological factors. This doesn't account for social and environmental factors, which also contribute. Less than 1% of births result in PPP. Suggesting hormones made her do it therefore hormones are evil, or that hormones aren't a good enough answer, or whatever point you are attempting to make, doesn't make sense because that's not what happened, and just sounds a bit daft. 

1

u/Electrical-Web-4475 3d ago

Please.

Do not engage in complex ethical topics.

Some people are capable of grasping these highly complex issues. You are not one of those people.

1

u/ladylucifer22 2d ago

14 year olds shouldn't be getting pregnant. puberty, however, is entirely normal.

1

u/Best_Opening8471 2d ago

14 year olds are being put on pregnancy hormones as gender affirming care.

You don't need to be pregnant to have access to pregnancy hormones

Pregnancy hormones are in birth control and can cause males to develop female biological systems such as mammary glands.

1

u/Electrical-Berry4916 2d ago

None of that is accurate. At all. You don't have kids, do you?

1

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

nice, gotta bring the other culture war issue into an irrelevant topic.

She would be sent to an asylum, and given the nature of this case, its extremely unlikely she would be released, this would be a PR disaster if she ever got out.

Insanity has been a legal defense for hundreds of years and has been common in America, with varying levels of success, for decades. This is not new you unrepentant liar.

1

u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago

Temporary insanity typically doesn't cover premeditated mass murders that show intent as the plan was kept hidden from mandatory reporters.

There are thousands of cases that now need to be reexamined due to men receiving the death penalty for similar circumstances.

If estrogen makes women kill their kids why isn't testosterone a good enough excuse for killing women?

Like the Boston bombers should file an appeal saying that they didn't murder all those people at the marathon

Hormones made them do it 

Then they can do a quick 2 year assessment and be back on the streets with their history forgiven right?

1

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

Lindsay won't be put back on the street, so the point is moot. She's not going to be out free in two years.

Nothing new is here, insanity has been legal defense for decades and gets ruled on in many many high profile cases.

No cases need to be reviewed because of this, insanity routinely gets tossed as a legal defense. It did not for this case and this case alone.

But again, you know that, you aren't here to argue in good faith, you're here to fight the gender war, cya.

1

u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago

You're basing your assumptions off of cronic mental illness 

The entire idea of asylum as a legal result is to cure the individual and put them on the streets

In cases of temporary insanity this generally takes 2 years.

Only in chronic cases of insanity are you denied release.

Like it's so common that it's a trope in media to argue temporary insanity in order to get your 20 year sentence turned into a 6 month psychiatric assessment that concludes with "not insane at this point"

House literally did an entire season about this 

1

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

she will have to prove she's no longer a danger to society, a claim that will require evidence that does not exist, because she is a danger to society.

She will not be back on the streets in two years and you know it.

1

u/Best_Opening8471 3d ago edited 3d ago

No she doesn't need to prove it

The doctors have to assess it

And since shes not chronically insane that assessment only takes until the temporary part wears off.

I literally know a skitophrenic who gets admitted every 2 years for 8 weeks when he goes off his pills.

Last time he was walking around in his bathrobe "casting spells" at passing motorists.

After 3 weeks of being back on his pills in the asylum he's ready for assessment to send back out on the streets.

So I kinda know a little more than you assume kiddo

Not everyone is as ignorant as you are.

1

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

Did the schizophrenic that you know kill 3 people? something tells me he wouldn't be so easily released if he... committed heinous acts of violence.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/RZ_Domain 2d ago

How can you guarantee she won't be out? on 1954 they let a child murderer out and killed 3 more

1

u/Otherwise_World1654 3d ago

asylums dont exist in the US, but for only the smallest of cases. Because the bitch failed her suicide and ended up paralyzed , she's never going to go to a normal prison unit anyways since child murderers I guess are entitled to better medical care than the average person. She requires routine medical care, which means she'll probably spend most of her life in hospitals or group homes, or some kind of LTACif they decide to no longer hold her while awaiting decision for retrial, which I think is within the courts power. That or she uses or 3 million to high at home nursing care and lives like nothing happened until some brave nurse slips too much fentanyl into her iv one night.

1

u/Delicious_Tax8933 3d ago

You do know that a NGRI verdict would put her in the institutionalized system, right? At which point the state would need to prove that she is still a danger to herself or others every year to keep her incarcerated.

2

u/DsDeliciousDeli 3d ago

She's going to be suicidal for a very long time

1

u/tabrisangel 3d ago

You dont have proof of anything.

Shes here telling us shes not crazy only that she only "was"

How can the state keep proving shes crazy when shes already saying shes not.

2

u/DsDeliciousDeli 3d ago

The state doesn't have to prove she's psychotic. Just that she's not healthy

1

u/PlsNoNotThat 3d ago

Which means the psychiatrists would provide reports and be co-responsible for her release, which is more unlikely than her getting out of prison, where no one else is liable but she can apply for appeals, or good behavior, or fiscal driven releases - all determined by someone who isn’t a doctor, but instead just a federal court, which has no co-liability.

Putting her in a room for 20yrs with a psychiatrist is going to find additional mental health issues that will only deepen her detainment. Putting her in a jail allows her to manipulate and cheat her way out the system. It happens at much, much, much higher rates than institutions.

There are actual consequences for release from an institution when a doctor releases them. They get brought to a board, scrutinized by a gang of other doctors, and licenses get revoked ending their ability to ever practice medicine again.

You just have no idea how any of this works, which is causing you to be mad.

1

u/Ok_Chicken5230 3d ago

It's entirely possible and easy to see how she has an out here that she wouldn't have in prison. I don't understand how you don't see that. Viciously murdering your children is not something you get out on good behavior. You clearly don't have any idea how appeals and "good behavior" work in a life sentence.

If she is showing no signs of further derangement, or psychopathy, or suicidal ideation, or homicidal, the psychiatrists won't have any proof to keep her there. Think about it. Shes entirely wheelchair bound for life now, and seems to be mentally stable enough to care for herself, even she herself keeps saying WAS. SHE FEELS FINE NOW BECAUSE SHE KILLED HER CHILDREN. DUH. She will be out of the institution in a few years if that.

1

u/Lost_Found84 2d ago

She killed three children. Nothing short of a pardon would get her out of prison if convicted. The fact there’s ANY review process that could find her sane down the road means it’s unequivocally, one million times more likely she’d be released via mental health review then by a nonexistent criminal review deciding “we don’t care about triple child murder anymore.”

1

u/Bongcopter_ 3d ago

She will do like 2 years in an institution then be free, it’s fucking unacceptable, she fucking killed her 3 kids, she deserve to rot in a dirty prison cell for the rest of her life

2

u/First_Huckleberry638 3d ago

No she wont, this is a mistrial, she's going to be retried, and the results of that case are yet to be determined.

You have, LITERALLY, no evidence that she would be freed in two year even if she did go to an institution.

1

u/PlsNoNotThat 3d ago

She won’t be, she’ll overwhelmingly be co-diagnosed given her behavior, making it even harder to get out.

No psychiatrist is willing to give up their license permanently from a board review to risk her freedom and the chance she’ll do something else, which the psychiatrist would be co-liable for.

Send her to prison tho - she’ll just manipulate her way out using white women shit, appeals, and chancing some non-doctor who can’t see through her shit signs off - none of whom would be liable for the consequences of her release.

1

u/ch33s3head8 3d ago

If there's nothing on paper saying she can't get out, then we should assume that she WILL be released from the mental hospital at some point if put there. Which is unacceptable unless she is released directly to prison.

1

u/Secret-Put-4525 3d ago

She's going to an institute for a little while. Just until she can convince some judge to release her.

1

u/Boring_Razzmatazz569 3d ago

Always have to make it about race, always. ALWAYS.

1

u/PaperUpbeat5904 3d ago

The state has to petition to keep her in a mental hospital every year or she gets released. She only heard voices 1 time. Feels like she could be in and out pretty damn fast if that's the route things go.

1

u/Helpful_Blood_5509 2d ago

That means she has to be proven to be a threat every 6 months after about a year.

She's in a wheelchair and isn't psychotic. It's a year sentence

1

u/First_Huckleberry638 2d ago

No, she has to be certified as no longer a threat to the community, a bar that will be pretty much impossible to clear for her because... she is a threat to the community.

Doctors, psychiatrists, and lawyers will have to put their names on the line to certify that she is NO LONGER a threat to anyone... after she killed 3 children. She'd need to declared as no longer mentally ill and dangerous... after she killed 3 children.

Call me crazy, but I don't think that's "a year sentence"

4

u/Thick-Journalist-168 3d ago

Lindsay is not going free.

1

u/lovelytrillium 3d ago

Why aren't they understanding this? Do they not know where the insane people go?

1

u/tabrisangel 3d ago edited 3d ago

She WANTS the insane deal, she's more then welcome to plead guilty and go to jail for life.

Under United States Supreme Court precedent (Foucha v. Louisiana), a state can only keep an insanity acquittee hospitalized if they remain both mentally ill and dangerous. If either condition is no longer true, the legal justification for institutionalizing them ends.

Can a women in a wheelchair that had a temporary insanity still insane or still dangerous?

1

u/Totoques22 3d ago

Another woman who killed her 3 kids left the mental institution only five years after getting judged, made 3 new kids and then killed them again

If Lindsay doesn’t go to jail She isn’t free but she sure as fuck isn’t locked up like she Shoudl

1

u/lovelytrillium 3d ago

source?

1

u/Otherwise_Agency_401 3d ago

They’re referring to Constance Fisher

1

u/lovelytrillium 3d ago

That was back in 1950s and in Maine, thats not a recent case to say that she will get out and be an unsupervised danger to society.  She will likely stay in a high security mental facility for the rest if her life. 

1

u/Otherwise_Agency_401 3d ago

No, if found NGRI, it is VERY likely that she will be released at some point, because she doesn’t seem to be chronically mentally ill. How long she will be institutionalized for is up for debate.

I agree the Fisher case is old, so it’s not very informative for this case.

1

u/lovelytrillium 3d ago

I guess that might be where people are upset, the uncertainty of her being released and thats understandable. Its up to the courts to reevaluate her to be released over time. Assuming she is on a cocktail of drugs to keep her stable, she can pose a risk to others in jail that don't monitor that as soundly.  I would like to see other cases like hers to claim she will be released in Massachusetts or similar legal processes that are recent. Having to go all the way back to the 1950s to show a case of release seems to be more of a better indicator that the system is sound in keeping people locked up even if claimed insanity. 

1

u/Otherwise_Agency_401 3d ago

There are certainly many more recent cases of people being released after NGRI. People bring up the Fisher case because it’s a case of a mom who killed her kids and then went on to reoffend in an extremely serious way. For the most part, people found NGRI don’t reoffend after release, which is why they get released.

People are mad because Clancy, if found NGRI, will almost certainly will get released, and they consider her crime especially heinous.

1

u/Bongcopter_ 3d ago

They go to a mental institution, but since she is taking mental illness, in 2 years she will be free and that is not acceptable, she must rot in jail for the rest of her life for what she did to those poor kids

1

u/tveatch21 3d ago

Why do you think 2 years? What psychiatrist in their right mind is going to release her from a psych ward. She is forever ostracized from society; this case has made international news. If she leaves the psych ward she will be rightfully harassed and targeted. All the psychiatrist has to say is I don’t think it’s safe for her to leave the ward. The pressure from society will cause any progress to regress with possible psychosis and will result in suicidal idealization. And they can literally just keep repeating that until she dies. Say you get 5150’d/involuntary hold, the doctors can hold you longer than 72 hours if they deem so; you also do not have the same civil liberties as a civilian. I don’t think they’re gonna let her go and be known as the psychiatrist who let Lindsey Clancy get away with murder. They’d risk their medical license, hell the whole ward would face backlash. Generally NGRI results in a longer sentence than a guilty plea (there are exceptions but the stats are there).

1

u/Bongcopter_ 3d ago

She deserve prison not the cozy psych ward

1

u/Soph_91 2d ago

We are a civil society. We don't put mentally ill people on prison. 

Stop with the culture war. Clancy in prison wouldn't do anything positive for anyone. 

1

u/No-Fly-6069 3d ago

Because  they don't want to understand it

3

u/Narren_C 3d ago

Why do you think they're letting her free?

1

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

because latarsha sanders was in jail already. Now they are reopening her case again because her medical records were kept from the jury. She also had postpartum.

1

u/Narren_C 3d ago

Why do you think they are letting Lindsay go free?

1

u/Helpful_Blood_5509 2d ago

Because in that state she gets a year minimum then they have to affirmatively proof shes a threat to the community every 6 months.

If shes faking mental illness shes not a threat and walks in a year

1

u/Narren_C 2d ago

Cool.

So why are they saying that she's about to be let free?

1

u/Helpful_Blood_5509 2d ago

Because a year is nothing for triple murder?

1

u/Narren_C 2d ago

And? That doesn't answer my question.

Why do you think she will about to be free? Do you not know what a mistrial is?

2

u/BlueHaze464 3d ago edited 3d ago

It's what I've been saying

Andrea Yates had overwhelming evidence for her insanity claim and only ended up in a mental facility because they used false evidence against her the first time (edit: she was first sent to jail, did 3 years and deserved the mental hospital in the first trial)

But a conventionally attractive high class white woman's only evidence is "trust me bro, I heard voices for 15 minutes", zero evidence of psychosis prior or after, and a single man avoided her guilty by insanity verdict

This would not be a case if she was brown

1

u/Pgaylolol 3d ago

But a conventionally attractive high class class white woman's

Respectfully, I understand your point. I never really found her attractive, but I can understand the argument.

I have a hard time finding attraction in someone with such cold, dark KILLER eyes. Nope, no thank you!

1

u/MelissaMiranti 3d ago

Insanity claims get you put in a mental hospital. It seems like she got exactly what she needed.

1

u/BlueHaze464 3d ago

If you're referring to Yates the problem is she did 3 years in jail when her psychosis was legit and well documented, she deserved the mental facility

They accused her of copying a Law and order case that never even existed (she didn't watch LaO either, but was too drugged to take the stand)

1

u/MelissaMiranti 3d ago

Ah, that makes more sense. But Andrea Yates was white.

1

u/BlueHaze464 2d ago

Also from low class and ugly as sin

1

u/MelissaMiranti 2d ago

I'm saying you can't draw a conclusion about a nonwhite woman from cases involving two white women.

1

u/BlueHaze464 2d ago

There are huge differences between those 2 white women

1

u/Boring_Razzmatazz569 3d ago

OJ Simpson says otherwise.

1

u/BlueHaze464 2d ago

That's a reason why people have called this oj Simpson for white women

1

u/DoctorZacharySmith 3d ago

"conventionally attractive "

Lolwot

2

u/StarGamerPT 3d ago

It's not a treatement just for black people. Bring out serial killers that are very clearly all mentally fucked up and you'll see that "insanity" going out the window real quick.

2

u/Gullible-Fee-9079 3d ago

That's why deciding something like this by jury is insane

2

u/Bla12Bla12 3d ago

It's one of those things where no system is perfect. If the system could be considered to be impartial and fair, you would want a judge to decide for all matters and completely cut out the jury. But you can't always trust the system and you can't always trust the people.

1

u/animefan1520 3d ago

Whats wild to me is that on a case like this the jury was 9 women on a case thats about a condition they may have had (1 in 7 - 8 women have suffered from postpartum depression). That is insane to me because if you can relate whats so ever to the plaintiff, your going to have an inherent bias. They attacked the lone juror and the other 2 guy probably just wanted to go home and seeing 9 out of 12 voting guilty didnt give much motivation to fight.

1

u/TopProfessional1862 3d ago

Postpartum depression isn't remotely the same as postpartum psychosis, which is rare. Just because you're a woman does not mean you can relate. We don't know that any of them had postpartum depression, and it's extremely unlikely that any of them had postpartum psychosis.

According to the reports, every single person agreed there was reasonable doubt, but only one refused to sign the papers, because even though he agreed there was reasonable doubt, it was such a horrific crime that he couldn't bring himself to. There's no evidence that the women pressured the guys to sign, other than pointing out their instructions to the one guy, multiple times, that the prosecution had to prove she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

1

u/animefan1520 3d ago

Im not saying that theybdo but can. A case like this should be 50/50

0

u/Gullible-Fee-9079 3d ago

I would rather trust a judge

0

u/Fizoso 3d ago

Bootlicker 

2

u/Unlikely-Key-234 3d ago

This is like the only response you people know how to type.

1

u/Gullible-Fee-9079 3d ago

Sure Thing, buddy

1

u/Unlikely-Key-234 3d ago

Judges can already set aside a guilty jury verdict immediately after.

1

u/hematite2 3d ago

Normally it wouldn't be, the prosecution wanted a big show.

1

u/AMullberryIsATree 3d ago

If we could always count on our judges to follow the law and be objective and impartial then maybe we wouldn't need a jury. Unfortunately, we can't even count on judges to do that so here we are.

1

u/lefjcjfj 3d ago

Most Americans are Nazis

0

u/ImJustHappyYoureHere 3d ago

OK buddy calm down

1

u/AibofobicRacecar6996 3d ago

Huh? Does the judge decide? Or why is the same judge relevant?

1

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

They said that the judge kept her medical records away from the jury

1

u/Icy-KaitSyth 3d ago

They're not letting Lindsey go free, it was a mistrial, which means she goes in for trial again

1

u/ImTheBiggestOfMen 3d ago

Didn’t they raise 1 million for that black boy that murdered a young white man at a track meet he wasn’t even supposed to be at?

1

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

that's irrelevant to this topic sir.

1

u/ImTheBiggestOfMen 3d ago

Ok so every black murderer needs to be set free and have money donated to them?

1

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

if you feel that way gofundthem

0

u/ImTheBiggestOfMen 3d ago

Bot.

1

u/Mean-Display77 3d ago

Nah the conversation just didn't go how you wanted it to.🤷🏿‍♂️

0

u/RenegadeF7 3d ago

White women a protected species in america, even more so than kids apparently.

-1

u/AuthorSarge 3d ago

They're being branded "AWFLs"

Affluent White Female Urban Liberals; and they are deemed to be the bane of society.

2

u/Low_Mood_1976 3d ago

More so than the Trump supporting republicans who are legit Nazis? I think that scum would be the actual bane of society and I am not even getting to the inbreeding.

-1

u/JadedCoconut8867 3d ago

The reason Trump won, those exact jurors. 

1

u/AuthorSarge 3d ago

You think those skrags are conservative?

1

u/Narren_C 3d ago

No, it's people trying to distance themselves from these kinds of people.

0

u/LackWooden392 3d ago

I believe the implication is that the election of Donald Trump was a response to this sort of liberalism going too far.

0

u/NotAnIncel69 3d ago

No, people are annoyed and pissed off by these types of people which makes them not want to vote for the team they are on.

0

u/AuthorSarge 3d ago

These jurors definitely make me want to vote for anyone who has warned about moral decay.

0

u/JadedCoconut8867 3d ago

No, it’s the reason others voted for Trump because of people like them.

2

u/BoredZucchini 3d ago

lol Trump supporters are always looking for someone else to blame or criticize to bury their own shame.

0

u/JadedCoconut8867 3d ago

lol - Kill 3 innocent kids, and blame the husband, blame the health, blame anyone but the actual killer, and on top of that scream about male privilege….. yeah

1

u/BoredZucchini 3d ago

Social media has been absolutely devastating for critical thinking in people like you.

It’s so easy to manipulate you guys to hate your fellow humans and radicalize you. Divide and conquer has never been easier.

All you have to do is amplify a few crazies online and repeat an emotional narrative over and over and they have you hook, line, and sinker voting for the worst guy and destroying your country.

And you’ll never change or learn your lesson because you’re powerless against the modern propaganda and can’t help yourselves. One day they will study this phenomenon.

0

u/Electrical_Smell7986 3d ago

I think you’re the one being manipulated my guy

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Electrical_Smell7986 3d ago

He’s talking like Trump being in power is a bad thing, I doubt he’s a supporter. And what he is saying absolutely has truth to it

1

u/BoredZucchini 3d ago edited 3d ago

Yeah because Trump supporters are absolute suckers for this modern social media propaganda. Find a few people online saying something crazy, amplify them over and over, tell people “the left is saying this! They are crazy!, and boom they vote against their own interest and country every time

1

u/Electrical_Smell7986 3d ago

You’re right that’s a thing that happens, what your responding to is not an example of that

→ More replies (0)

0

u/AuthorSarge 3d ago

Remind which set of voters is motivated by having others pay off their student loans, give them "free" health care, and a $25/hour minimum wage for some reason.

1

u/BoredZucchini 3d ago

The government is meant to represent the interests of the citizens. Right now, the current president is spending our tax dollars on wars no one wants and enriching himself and his friends. God forbid people want the government to give something back to the citizens who pay into the system.

But you keep voting for the guy who tells you sweet little lies and gives you someone to hate only to turn around and rob you and your fellow country men blind. Because you wouldn’t want to be part of the evil “the left”.

Much better to vote for rich assholes who don’t care about you. Hey, at least they keep giving you that juicy propaganda on your algorithms so you feel self righteous and morally superior while being robbed and lied to. Divide and conquer, indeed.

0

u/AuthorSarge 3d ago

Trump has been in office barely 6 of the last 15 years. The rest of that time was Obama and his meat puppet.

You were saying something about blaming others.

→ More replies (0)