Takeaways from day 11 of Trump’s New York hush money trial with Hope Hicks | Donald Trump News

With tears and an open admission of nerves, Hope Hicks, a former advisor to Donald Trump, has taken to the witness stand in New York City, where she has been called to testify in the former United States president’s criminal hush money trial.

Friday marked day 11 in the trial, and Hicks was arguably the highest profile witness to testify so far.

A former model turned communications director, Hicks was one of Trump’s longest serving aides, helping his 2016 presidential campaign navigate the scandals at the heart of the New York criminal case.

Trump stands accused of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records at the time of the 2016 race, related to hush money payments made to the adult film star Stormy Daniels.

Daniels had claimed she and Trump had an affair, and prosecutors have argued Trump tried to buy her silence as a means of influencing the election. He was already under scrutiny at the time for statements made on tape about his interactions with women.

Trump has denied the extramarital affair, and he has insisted he committed no wrongdoing. His defence team has argued that Trump simply hoped to spare his family embarrassment — not interfere with the election.

The New York trial is one of four criminal cases Trump faces as he runs for reelection this November. Here are five takeaways from Friday’s hearings:

Former US President Donald Trump poses with his White House Communications Director Hope Hicks in 2018 [File: Andrew Harnik/AP Photo]

Yes, Trump is allowed to testify

The day’s legal drama began even before Trump entered the courtroom, as the former president sought to backtrack on comments he had made the evening before.

On Thursday, Trump had falsely told reporters, “I’m not allowed to testify.”

“This judge is totally conflicted, has me under an unconstitutional gag order,” Trump continued. “Nobody’s ever had that before. And we don’t like it.”

But as he returned to court on Friday, Trump attempted to clarify his earlier statement: “The gag order is not to testify. The gag order stops me from talking about people and responding when they say things about me.”

Thursday’s comments, however, remained Judge Juan Merchan’s first order of business as he took the bench.

“The order restricting extrajudicial statements does not prevent you from testifying in any way,” Merchan said on Friday.

A man on a horse holds a US flag outside the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse.
Couy Griffin, a supporter of former President Donald Trump, rode his horse outside the courthouse on the 11th day of the trial [Ted Shaffrey/AP Photo]

Witnesses testify from district attorney’s office

As testimony continued, the first two witnesses of the day spoke to the technical aspects of the case.

Returning from Thursday was forensic analyst Douglas Daus, from the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. He had previously shared evidence that was retrieved from the phone of Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, including secret recordings.

Emil Bove, from Trump’s defence team, attempted to get Daus to admit to “gaps in the handling of this data” by pointing out that the events in question happened in 2016 — and Daus received the phone to examine in 2023.

Then, another witness from the district attorney’s office took the stand: paralegal Georgia Longstreet. She spoke to evidence gathered from Trump’s social media accounts, including a post from 2016 complaining about levels of support from women voters.

Former President Donald Trump, centre, speaks to his lawyers in the courtroom [Mark Peterson/Pool Photo via AP Photo]

Hope Hicks takes the witness stand

The third witness of the day was the most anticipated: Hicks, a former member of Trump’s inner circle.

At age 26, after working for Trump’s daughter Ivanka, Hicks was handpicked to be his press secretary as he launched his 2016 presidential bid.

Prosecutors subpoenaed her to testify about the inner workings of the campaign and the Trump Organization.

Hicks testified she thought Trump “might be joking” by naming her his press secretary. But she explained she was quickly on the road to states like Iowa, on the campaign trail with the then-candidate.

She explained that Trump was very involved in the day-to-day media strategy of his campaign.
“I would say that Mr. Trump was responsible,” she said of his authority over press relations. “He knew what he wanted to say and how he wanted to say it, and we were all just following his lead.”

In this courtroom sketch, Hope Hicks dabs her eyes while being questioned by defence lawyer Emil Bove [Jane Rosenberg/Reuters]

Hicks reflects on Access Hollywood tape

Much of her testimony, however, revolved around an audio recording known as the Access Hollywood tape, which captured Trump bragging about “grabbing” women by the genitalia.

Hicks explained she first became aware of the recording when a Washington Post reporter emailed her a transcript.

“I was concerned, very concerned,” she said, testifying that she encouraged the campaign to “deny, deny, deny”.

The tape became public in October 2016, one month before that year’s presidential election. In the aftermath, Hicks said Trump was concerned how his wife Melania would react.

“I don’t think he wanted anyone in his family to be hurt or embarrassed by anything happening in the campaign,” she told the court.

Hicks also spoke about how she became aware of allegations Trump had an affair with Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal.

Daniels, she said, briefly came up in conversation at a celebrity golf tournament.

She also explained that, in November 2016, the Wall Street Journal reached out about claims of Trump’s extramarital affairs — and the alleged “catch-and-kill” scheme orchestrated to suppress the story in the media.

“He was concerned about how it would be viewed by his wife, and he wanted me to make sure the newspapers weren’t delivered to their residence that morning,” Hicks said.

At one point, she excused herself from the courtroom in tears, forcing a brief pause in the proceedings.

Former President Donald Trump reportedly listened intently to his former aide Hope Hicks on the witness stand [Jane Rosenberg/Reuters]

Trump pays gag order fine

Friday was the deadline for Trump to pay a $9,000 fine for nine violations of his gag order, resulting from a ruling earlier in the week.

But the former president discharged his fine on Thursday, with two cashier cheques: one for $2,000 and another for $7,000.

That was not the end of the matter, though. As Friday’s court proceedings wound to a close before the weekend recess, prosecutors petitioned the judge for the ability to question Trump about the gag order violations.

Trump is barred from speaking about jurors, witnesses, court staff and other people involved in the trial in a way that might affect court proceedings.

But Judge Merchan brushed aside the prosecutors’ request, on the basis that it could unfairly bias the jury.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

What’s behind the US generational divide on Israel’s war on Gaza? | Israel War on Gaza News

Polls suggest an increasing number of young Americans are siding with Palestinians and growing critical of Israel.

Successive US administrations across the political divide have backed Israel since it was created in 1948.

But polls suggest that public support for Israel in the United States now appears to be waning, especially among young people.

A Pew Research study two years ago indicated that only 41 percent in the age group of 18 to 29 had a favourable view of Israel.

And many students from this generation are now protesting on university campuses against the war on Gaza, which has killed nearly 35,000 Palestinians.

So, is the anger among young Americans highlighting a generational divide in Washington’s policy towards Israel?

And what are the reasons reshaping public opinion?

Presenter:

Nick Clark

Guests:

Clair Davenport – Student at Columbia Journalism School

Julie Norman – Deputy director at UCL Centre on US Politics

Keir Milburn – Author of Generation Left, a book examining generational differences

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Journalists ‘have zero protection’: Hind Khoudary on reporting from Gaza | Israel War on Gaza

Marc Lamont Hill talks to Al Jazeera journalist Hind Khoudary on World Press Freedom Day about reporting from Gaza.

As the world marks Press Freedom Day, we turn to Gaza and the mounting toll of journalist deaths since October 7th. More than 100 media workers have been killed in the last seven months, as Israel continues its deadly war on Gaza.

So how are journalists in Gaza continuing their reporting? And are journalists in the West doing enough to shine a light on the plight of their Palestinian colleagues?

This week on UpFront, Marc Lamont Hill speaks to Hind Khoudary, an Al Jazeera journalist who has been reporting from the ground since day one.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Jewish professor banned from US campus after arrest | Israel War on Gaza

NewsFeed

A Jewish professor who was filmed being violently arrested during an anti-Gaza war protest at Dartmouth College in the US says she had been banned from the university’s campus. Dartmouth said the ban was down to court officials and will request that ‘any errors be corrected’.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Apple iPhone sales plunge, as shares rise on dividend, stock buyback news | Technology

Sales of the iPhone fall 10 percent amid growing competition from Chinese rivals such as Huawei.

Apple’s revenue has dipped for a fifth consecutive quarter, driven by the steepest decline in iPhone sales since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The California-based tech giant on Thursday reported a profit of $23.6bn on $90.8bn in revenue during the January-March period.

Sales of the iPhone fell 10 percent, to $45.7 bn, amid growing competition from Chinese rivals such as Huawei and Xiaomi.

Sales in Greater China, one of Apple’s most important markets, fell to $16.4bn from $17.8bn year-on-year, a nearly 8 percent decline.

The sales drop marked the biggest slump since the third quarter of 2020 when factory closures due to COVID delayed the release of the iPhone 12.

Still, the revenue drop came in ahead of investors’ expectations, and the company’s shares surged on news of a stock buyback and higher quarterly dividend.

Apple shares rose nearly 6 percent in after-market trading as the firm announced it would buy back $110bn of its own stock and raise its quarterly dividend by 4 percent to $0.25 a share.

“Thanks to very high levels of customer satisfaction and loyalty, our active installed base of devices has reached a new all-time high across all products and all geographic segments, and our business performance drove a new EPS record for the March quarter,” Apple CFO Luca Maestri said in a statement.

“Given our confidence in Apple’s future and the value we see in our stock, our board has authorised an additional $110bn for share repurchases. We are also raising our quarterly dividend for the 12th year in a row.”

Apple’s tepid results come after a rocky start to the year for the company.

As well as coming under growing pressure from low-cost Chinese rivals, the company is facing scrutiny from antitrust regulators in the US and Europe and recently abandoned its decade-long project to build an electric car.

Meanwhile, Apple’s mixed-reality headset, the Vision Pro, the company’s only new product since the release of the Apple Watch in 2015, has yet to significantly contribute to sales.

The trend-setting company is also battling perceptions that it is falling behind rivals such as Microsoft and Google in the race to develop and roll out artificial intelligence (AI).

During a conference call on Thursday, Apple CEO Tim Cook sought to assure analysts that the company has AI products in the works.

“We believe in the transformative power and promise of AI, and we believe we have advantages that will differentiate us in this new era,” Cook said.

“We’ll talk more about that in the weeks ahead,” he added.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

US acknowledges Syria air strike killed farmer rather than al-Qaeda leader | Drone Strikes News

Botched strike is latest incident to raise questions about lack of accountability for civilian deaths from US strikes.

The United States Department of Defense has acknowledged that a drone strike in Syria, initially said to have successfully targeted an al-Qaeda leader, actually killed a farmer.

The Pentagon stated on Thursday that the drone strike on May 3, 2023, killed a 56-year-old shepherd named Lutfi Hasan Masto, whom they initially misidentified as a senior member of al-Qaeda.

US Central Command, which oversees military activities in the Middle East, wrote that it “acknowledges and regrets the civilian harm that resulted from the airstrike”.

The killing of Masto is the latest incident to raise questions about the impact of US drone warfare on civilians, who often pay the price for botched strikes.

The US has become increasingly reliant on armed drones to carry out strikes in numerous countries in the Middle East and Africa, which allows its military to target armed groups without the risks or potential public backlash that accompany deploying troops on the ground.

But despite a series of high-profile incidents — including a drone strike during the US withdrawal from Afghanistan that killed 10 civilians, including seven children — accountability for US officials has been rare. Families of the civilians killed in strikes have also struggled to claim restitution.

The Pentagon said that few details of the Masto investigation would be released, citing the classification of sensitive information, but that the strike complied with the laws of armed conflict.

The Washington Post, a US news outlet, published a report last year casting doubt on the Pentagon’s initial version of events regarding the strike, including its claim that it was an al-Qaeda leader who was killed.

The Associated Press also reported shortly after the strike that relatives and neighbours said that the victim had no association with armed groups and was instead a farmer who raised sheep, chickens and cattle.

“The investigation revealed several issues that could be improved,” US Central Command said. “We are committed to learning from this incident and improving our targeting processes to mitigate potential civilian harm.”



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Abu Ghraib: Iraqi victims’ case against US contractor ends in mistrial | The Iraq War: 20 years on News

The trial was a historic attempt at justice, marking the first time victims of the abuse that took place at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq testified in front of civilian jurors in the United States.

But on Thursday, the judge overseeing the civil case in Virginia declared a mistrial, as the jury was unable to overcome a deadlock after eight days of deliberation.

The trial focused on the human rights abuses committed at the prison following the US’s invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq.

Reports of abuse started to emerge in 2003 and later hit a fever pitch in 2004, with the release of photographs showing smiling US captors standing next to naked prisoners, posed in degrading positions.

The images became emblematic of the fallout of Washington’s so-called “global war on terror”. Calls for justice have continued two decades later.

At question in the Virginia trial was whether civilian interrogators, supplied to the US Army by the Virginia-based contractor CACI, conspired with soldiers to abuse detainees as a means of “softening them up” for questioning.

The trial began on April 15, and lawyers for the three Iraqi plaintiffs argued that CACI was liable for mistreatment even if they could not prove that the contractor’s interrogators were the ones who directly inflicted the abuse.

The evidence presented at the Virginia court included testimony from the three former prisoners: Salah Hasan al-Ejaili, Suhail Al Shimari, and Asa’ad al-Zuba’e. It was the first time any victims had testified directly to a civilian US jury.

They recounted being subjected to different forms of torture by US military personnel and private contractors. The result, they said, has been physical and psychological torment that has weighed on their lives for the past two decades.

Al-Ejaili, who was working as a journalist for Al Jazeera at the time of his arrest, described offering his testimony as akin to “a form of treatment or a remedy”.

Prosecutors also introduced reports and testimony from two retired US army generals, who documented the abuse. They had concluded that multiple CACI interrogators were complicit.

The reports found that one of the civilian interrogators, Steven Stefanowicz, lied to investigators about his conduct at the prison. They concluded that Stefanowicz likely instructed soldiers to mistreat detainees and used dogs to intimidate people during interrogations.

Stefanowicz denied participating in the mistreatment in a recorded video deposition.

Evidence introduced at the trial, however, showed that officials at CACI had doubts about Stefanowicz’s ability to work as an interrogator — but that he was promoted to the position shortly after arriving in Iraq due to a manpower shortage.

Lawyers for CACI broadly argued that its employees had extremely limited interaction with the three plaintiffs. They said that any liability for the mistreatment belonged to the US government.

The abuses at Abu Ghraib came to light largely as the result of an April 2004 report by CBS News.

An image of a hooded prisoner holding electrical wires and standing on a box soon became emblematic of what rights groups have characterised as wide-scale abuses committed by US military personnel and private contractors following the 2003 Iraq invasion.

A subsequent report by the International Red Cross found that the vast majority of detainees were civilians with no links to armed groups.

The myriad abuses it documented at the facility were in some cases “tantamount to torture”, the Red Cross said.

A total of 11 US soldiers were convicted in military courts in the following years, with nine sentenced to time in prison.

But it has been difficult for victims to pursue further legal recourse. US law broadly grants the government immunity from lawsuits arising from war.

In September, Human Rights Watch said the US has “apparently failed to provide compensation or other redress to Iraqis who suffered torture and other abuse by US forces at Abu Ghraib and other US-run prisons in Iraq two decades ago”.

Former prisoners have instead sought compensation from contractors. In 2013, the Center for Constitutional Rights won a $5m settlement for its Iraqi clients against contractor Titan Corp.

The group also represented the three clients in the case against CACI. Thursday’s mistrial, however, leaves open the possibility that the plaintiffs can pursue another trial.

When asked if they would do so, Baher Azmy, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, indicated they would.

“The work we put into this case is a fraction of what they endured as survivors of the horrors of Abu Ghraib, and we want to honour their courage,” he said.

Al-Ejaili, one of the Abu Ghraib survivors, likewise indicated in a press statement that he could continue to seek justice.

“We might not have received justice yet in our just case today, but what is more important is that we made it to trial and spoke up so the world could hear from us directly,” he said. “This will not be the final word; what happened in Abu Ghraib is engraved into our memories and will never be forgotten in history.”

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Police clear pro-Palestine encampment at UCLA | Israel War on Gaza

NewsFeed

Over 130 students have been arrested after police cleared the UCLA campus of anti-Gaza war demonstrators following orders from the university to disperse what they called an unlawful gathering.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

How US violates its own Leahy Law to ensure military support for Israel | Politics News

Washington, DC – Elderly Palestinian American Omar Assad was handcuffed, blindfolded and gagged by Israeli soldiers and left to die in a cold car park.

His fatal detention in January 2022 sparked outrage and calls for accountability in the United States, with advocates urging the American government to apply the country’s own laws to restrict military aid to the Israeli unit that killed the 80-year-old United States citizen.

Israel’s notorious Netzah Yehuda battalion – who had detained Assad – had been accused of other abuses, as well.

But more than two years later, this week, the US announced that it will not apply the Leahy Law, which prohibits assistance to foreign military units that commit abuses, to restrict aid to any Israeli army divisions currently.

“It is outrageous that the secretary of state is breaching US law to continue a long streak of treating Israel as an exception to the law,” said Raed Jarrar, the advocacy director at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), a think tank in Washington, DC.

Last month, media reports indicated that the US was set to apply the Leahy Law to the Netzah Yehuda battalion, but after strong, public pushback from Israeli leaders, the US appears to have decided against the move.

Here, Al Jazeera looks at the Leahy Law, and how successive US administrations have failed to apply it to Israel.

What is the Leahy Law?

Named after retired US Senator Patrick Leahy, the rules under the Foreign Assistance Act prohibit military assistance to forces engaged in gross violations of human rights.

There are two similar yet specific sets of Leahy regulations for the State Department and the Pentagon, respectively. Hence, the rules are sometimes called the Leahy Laws in plural.

The law allows funding to resume after the foreign country receiving the US aid takes steps to correct the abuses and hold perpetrators accountable.

“Both laws aim to prevent US security assistance from going to foreign forces that we know – that the US knows – have committed gross violations of human rights,” said Sarah Harrison, senior US analyst at the Crisis Group think tank.

“The idea is that Congress is trying to advance this value of human rights. And at the same time, they’re also trying to advance the value of accountability – getting rid of these cultures of impunity among foreign security forces, which would allow assistance to flow again.”

What are gross violations of human rights?

US law defines gross violations of human rights (GVHR) in broad terms.

“The term ‘gross violations of internationally recognized human rights’ includes torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of person,” it reads.

But Jarrar, who has been working on Leahy Law issues for years, said the US Department of State mainly focuses on four types of abuses: extrajudicial killings, torture, rape as a weapon of war and enforced disappearances.

How does it work?

When Washington assesses that there is credible information that a unit in a country that receives US aid has committed gross violations of human rights, it should cut off the forces involved in the abuses.

The US should also inform the foreign government to allow it to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Harrison, a former associate general counsel at the Department of Defense, stressed the application of the law should be automatic. She said media reports that the US was set to impose “sanctions” on Israel’s Netzah Yehuda battalion were off the mark.

US sanctions – such as the penalties that targeted violent Israeli settlers earlier this year – are largely discretionary options at the executive branch’s disposal. Officials, usually in the State Department or Treasury, decide if, when, and on whom sanctions should be applied, within guidelines set by existing laws or executive orders.

However, that executive discretion does not exist with Leahy. The law – if applied properly – would legally compel the secretary of state to enforce it.

Leahy rules require cutting off units that commit gross violations of human rights from US funding. It is not a policy choice, Harrison explained.

“It’s not up for negotiation. It is a binding domestic law on the executive branch,” she told Al Jazeera.

How does the US deal with Leahy Law and Israel?

When it comes to Israel, there is a special Israel Leahy Vetting Forum that looks at allegations of abuse by Israeli forces. Anyone can submit a report for Leahy vetting to the State Department, as DAWN did after the killing of Assad.

But Jarrar said Israel is given special treatment when it comes to Leahy complaints.

The US gives Israel 90 days to respond to inquiries about abuses, according to Jarrar – a timeline not afforded to any other country.

Has the Leahy Law ever been applied to Israel?

No.

Why is Leahy Law in the news?

It all started on April 20, when Axios reported that the US is set to “sanction” the Netzah Yehuda battalion over abuses in the occupied West Bank by applying the Leahy Law to the unit.

How did Israel respond?

Israeli leaders forcefully rejected any measures against their forces. Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant visited troops from the Netzah Yehuda battalion days after the news broke out.

“No one in the world can teach us about values and morals,” Gallant was quoted by Israeli media outlets as saying. “We are at the beginning of the war against seven armies and terrorist organisations. The security apparatus is behind you.”

For his part, war cabinet minister Benny Gantz – who appears to have close relations with the Biden administration – warned that any US move against Israeli forces “sets a dangerous precedent and conveys the wrong message to our shared enemies during war time”.

“I intend on acting to have this decision changed,” he wrote in a social media post.

What has the US said?

The State Department said on Monday that it found that five Israeli army units were responsible for gross violations of human rights, but that it had decided against applying the Leahy Law to them.

“Four of these units have effectively remediated these violations, which is what we expect partners to do,” US spokesperson Vedant Patel told reporters, adding that Washington is in discussions with Israel about the fifth unit, believed to be Netzah Yehuda.

All the abuses in question were committed before the outbreak of the war on Gaza last year, Patel said.

The US administration did not name the units or identify the measures taken to address their abuses, raising questions about its approach to Israel.

Al Jazeera has reached out to the State Department with a request for comment.

Harrison said the law sets a high bar to resume funding for units involved in gross violations of human rights.

“You have to investigate, you have to prosecute and you have to sentence,” she said of bringing forces that commit abuses to justice.

Israel rarely prosecutes its own soldiers. For example, no one was charged in the killing of Palestinian American Omar Assad.

How does the decision violate the Leahy Law?

The Biden administration is engaging in the process backwards, said Harrison. The law requires suspending funding to units engaged in gross violations of human rights, then engaging with the foreign government on accountability.

But the State Department is allowing aid to flow to at least one Israeli unit that has not taken adequate remedial steps to address violations.

“If it’s in fact true that the department has known about these cases for years and assistance has continued to flow while they do the remediation process – and no exception has been sent to Congress – they are in violation of the Leahy Law,” Harrison told Al Jazeera.

For his part, Jarrar said the Biden administration is not only violating the law but its own lax 90-day system that it set up for Israel as it continues funding to a unit whose unremedied abuses it acknowledged.

“They have made the determination that the unit has been engaged in gross violations and that the host country has failed to remediate,” Jarrar told Al Jazeera.

“And they still have not cut off that unit. That is an admission that the secretary of state is violating US law. He is breaching our law for political considerations.”

Why does it matter?

Israel receives at least $3.8bn in US military aid annually. And Biden signed off on $14bn in additional aid to the US ally last month.

While withholding funding from a single battalion may appear inconsequential, Jarrar said the move would have had a major effect.

“It does send a message that Israel is not the most moral army in the world, that Israel does not have a legitimate system to hold itself accountable,” Jarrar said.

“It would send shockwaves through Washington and Tel Aviv because that means Israel has been added to the club of human rights abusers. It means that Israel would have to deal with a new reality that the blank cheque policy is over, and that there is a small hole in the dam, but the dam is breaking.”

On a practical level, Jarrar said isolating one army unit from US funding would also allow greater transparency, oversight and accountability on US aid to Israel.

What about Gaza?

Israel’s war on Gaza, which has killed 34,500 Palestinians, has unleashed a flood of allegations of human rights abuses and war crimes.

Both Harrison and Jarrar said the Leahy Law should apply to Israeli forces in Gaza.

While war conduct is largely examined through international humanitarian law, Harrison said gross human rights violations often overlap with violations of the laws of war.

She said abuses including executing civilians, sexual violence and torture, for example, are both gross violations of human rights and breaches of international humanitarian law

“If a crime occurs during war that’s also a gross violation of human rights, it will still trigger the Leahy Law,” Harrison said.



Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Videos show violence of mob attack on UCLA anti-war protesters | Gaza

NewsFeed

Videos of the attack on the anti-Gaza war protest camp at UCLA have shown the extent of the violence used by a pro-Israel mob. A day after the protesters were assaulted, police in Los Angeles declared the camp unlawful and moved in to clear it.

Check out our Latest News and Follow us at Facebook

Original Source

Exit mobile version