General US Politics

[eclipse]

Cruz is not saner than Trump.

I give a shit about privacy. Cruz's privacy stances are much saner than the rest of the GOP.

[Terrador]

I'd much sooner see Republican Nominee Trump than Republican Nominee Cruz. So far as I figure it, the damage of Trump existing has already been largely done; he's been a front-runner for the nomination for months, his platform (though incoherent, there's an obvious uniting element of nationalism, bigotry, and basically most of the worst kinds of conservatism) is well-known and the support for it is also well-known; difference is, Trump gets shredded without question in the general election. Bernie vs. Zodiac Killer might actually be a rough ride, should it come to that.

Is this an appropriate place for a political question? If so, in the tag below.

[spoiler=immigration and social reform]Right, so I'd consider myself a pretty liberal person, in general. I think we have a responsibility to provide universal human dignity (that is, create financial and social infrastructure so any person born here can have an unmolested life under modern standards of acceptable quality of life: physical and mental health care, an unambiguous financial safety net, et cetera). I believe that we need to move away from a meritocratic economy, especially since capital is what creates the lion's share of value, and like many many people, I believe our social measures for protecting and socially supporting disadvantaged demographics are... anemic at best.

Now, should those social reforms take place in the United States, that would make this country an extraordinarily rewarding place for people to migrate to, for good reason. This makes me think "hrm, if this is the case, and we extend our Awesome New Benefits to illegal immigrants as well, won't we see a flood that may imperil our infrastructure (less so our capacity to produce, if everything started getting distributed in a truly progressive, proto-socialist way)?"... and yet, so far as I can tell, the politicians with whom I agree on most things diverge on this. This leads me to believe I'm probably wrong, but... what stems the tide? Are there good studies on how quality of life in the desti-nation (ha, puns!) impacts rates of immigration? What about the United States' carrying capacity, should such utopic reforms come to exist? If you've done your research on this, help me out please~?

[tuvarkz]

lol, your ability to see sanders' desire for a clean road to candidacy as a weakness is impressive. also, what would have had him do at the rally? it would have been really bad press for him to throw out blm protesters since bad press is bad for any candidate except trump. he went on to speak to 15000 people later that night, uninterrupted. he's done most of his speeches uninterrupted. do you really think trump saying "throw them out" is strength? when he incites violence against those who think differently, is that strength?

with the leak of the panama papers, i don't see how free market capitalism can still be supported by anyone. it's an old and very dumb idea.

like what, specifically? would you call this a mild inaccuracy? it's a flat-out lie, and you're falling for the lies.

a businessman that would have more money if he took his original money and left it in the bank is no businessman. the shit you're willing to put up with because trump is on the republican ticket is insane. and how is the "model" an overall improvement?

from his website:

1. If you are single and earn less than $25,000, or married and jointly earn less than $50,000, you will not owe any income tax. That removes nearly 75 million households – over 50% – from the income tax rolls. They get a new one page form to send the IRS saying, “I win,” those who would otherwise owe income taxes will save an average of nearly $1,000 each.

"i win"? what the fuck did these people win? being some of the poorest people in the united states? his tax reform doesn't hold up to scrutiny. i mean, conservatives are so adamantly against taxes, but do you realize that taxes are pretty much what holds a society together?

authoritarianism is historically the antithesis of american politics.

From Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/17/omnibus-funds-illegal-immigrant-resettlement-united-states/

Again, not entirely accurate, but fundamentally true. Half-truth, I'll rate it.

His tax plan seems to be obviously focusing on helping the middle class. People without a significant amount of wealth shouldn't be paying to keep those that aren't willing to work or aren't good enough to be hired afloat. Or as this guy says:

Also, historical antithesis? Oh, tell me all about the authoritarian governments the US supported all during history just because said regimes were beneficial to US's trade/economy.

According to tuvarkz: being a mature adult is "weak".

Okay.

I suspect he thinks Sanders should have cussed those uppity females out and ejected them from the rally, as a display of his incredible strength and charisma. No one outspeaks a real man!

re: the strained relations between us and the Muslim world - pretty sure we'd need to at least talk to them to be effective in any strategy against ISIL, or are we proposing we completely ignore them, too? That seems contrary to Trump's solution of going in there and bombing and torturing suspected terrorists.

No, not because they are females. It's because letting hooligans disrespect you is an obvious sign that you will get pushed around by others as well. I will not respect a man that doesn't respect himself and his own arguments. (And then, I believe there's a considerable amount of pro-Sanders people that don't care about BLM or their arguments. Heck, they get disrespected too because they went to hear Sanders speak, not BLM speak)

About the Muslim world? Just carpet bomb ISIS until there's nothing left, and leave it as a warning. The rest of them decide to play terrorist too? They are made into another example until they learn not to try and pull it again.

tuvarkz, I see where you're coming from on the Sanders thing, but I disagree that what he did there determines how much backbone he has. Bernie is an ally of BLM, and even if he disagreed with their hijacking of his podium, I don't think he wanted to remove them because he generally agrees with what they say anyway, and the media backlash just wouldn't have been worth it. As for his bout with Hillary, he probably wants the Democratic primary to be as clean as possible, to make the party look great in contrast to some of the outright dick measuring contests in the GOP. He's playing the "bigger man" card whilst keeping the party from getting too divided in case Hillary is the nominee. If it goes well, he gets the nomination and probably the presidency. If it doesn't, he potentially gets a President Clinton who publicly shares a good chunk of his ideas, and can't act against them without voter backlash.

Ally of BLM? (And to note, isn't Hillary the one that is getting most of the Democrat African-American vote anyways?) You mean allying with a Soros-funded, race-focused, thuggish if not outright lawbreaking group that actually seems to have been given political power by a government too scared to be politically incorrect?

[Terrador]

People without a significant amount of wealth shouldn't be paying to keep those that aren't willing to work or aren't good enough to be hired afloat.

So if you were unable to work for whatever reason, you wouldn't deserve to eat? Cool.

Seriously though. Don't talk shit about what our collective priorities are until you come to the 21st century, where we tend to think that feeding people we can feed is a Good Idea.

[tuvarkz]

So if you were unable to work for whatever reason, you wouldn't deserve to eat? Cool.

Seriously though. Don't talk shit about what our collective priorities are until you come to the 21st century, where we tend to think that feeding people we can feed is a Good Idea.

Hm, I'll make a precision correction on this one: If you aren't good enough to be hired, save special situations (Such as physical/mental disabilities), then yes, middle class people shouldn't get dragged down because of you. Of course, if Trump decides to further reduce foreign aid to keep social services afloat, I have no issue with that.

[eclipse]

Hm, I'll make a precision correction on this one: If you aren't good enough to be hired, save special situations (Such as physical/mental disabilities), then yes, middle class people shouldn't get dragged down because of you. Of course, if Trump decides to further reduce foreign aid to keep social services afloat, I have no issue with that.

I suppose this also covers things like mothers on maternity leave. Or people who just got fired, who may not be seen as ideal candidates for another job (i.e. someone losing their job at age 55 as opposed to 35). Or maybe the person who's been unable to report to work because they've been hospitalized for the past two weeks.

There's a lot of ways to be shit out of luck in the employment world.

[Terrador]

Hm, I'll make a precision correction on this one: If you aren't good enough to be hired, save special situations (Such as physical/mental disabilities), then yes, middle class people shouldn't get dragged down because of you. Of course, if Trump decides to further reduce foreign aid to keep social services afloat, I have no issue with that.

What about the boys who could never go to high school because they had to cross gang lines to do so? What about the people accused of a felony, truthfully or not, who can almost never get hired regardless of their trustworthiness and worth as employees? What about the moms with disabled kids that have to choose between staying home full-time to give the kid a decent quality of life and hoping the community comes together to feed them, or going to work and leaving the poor kid to its own devices?

People shouldn't need to earn the right to eat when capital makes the overwhelming majority of the money (who's more valuable to McDonald's, five of you or one machine that prints McNugget boxes?) and we have more than enough to keep everyone in the United States out of poverty.

[Moblin Major General]

^That's a slippery slope. While there is enough money, there are far fewer people and groups who are willing to give some of their fair share in order to make up for those who can't make up theirs. We need tax money, something we won't get if politicians keep offering big business and rich people tax credits for "philanthropy" in order to keep their jobs. If I were president, as much as it may seem to violate the constitution, I would EO turn limits for non-judicial politicians, because I'm being subjected to one by amendment. I would also ban Senators and Reps from getting raises. I would say military spending should be also, but I would rather cut intelligence spending, if only to disempower the NSA, CIA, and FBI from operating without warrant.

[tuvarkz]

What about the boys who could never go to high school because they had to cross gang lines to do so? What about the people accused of a felony, truthfully or not, who can almost never get hired regardless of their trustworthiness and worth as employees? What about the moms with disabled kids that have to choose between staying home full-time to give the kid a decent quality of life and hoping the community comes together to feed them, or going to work and leaving the poor kid to its own devices?

People shouldn't need to earn the right to eat when capital makes the overwhelming majority of the money (who's more valuable to McDonald's, five of you or one machine that prints McNugget boxes?) and we have more than enough to keep everyone in the United States out of poverty.

Did you read the (Such as...) part? I didn't specifically limit the concept to mental/physical disabilities only. I was just putting them as the most clear examples.

[Lord Raven]

Did you read the (Such as...) part? I didn't specifically limit the concept to mental/physical disabilities only. I was just putting them as the most clear examples.

Well gee I guess none of us knew that, considering your viewpoints are pretty far removed from the issues that plague us right now. What about the stuff clipsey said?

Have you actually ever lived in the US and experienced the problems that we do as young 20-somethings?

Edited April 7, 2016 by Lord Raven

[dondon151]

letting people disrespect you is a sign of preserving the first amendment lmao

[tuvarkz]

Well gee I guess none of us knew that, considering your viewpoints are pretty far removed from the issues that plague us right now. What about the stuff clipsey said?

Have you actually ever lived in the US and experienced the problems that we do as young 20-somethings?

Not really, but as far as I've got it, there's a high competition job market, where most people go for massively expensive degrees in colleges when in many cases they aren't much more useful than technical training or are outright underwater basket weaving-tier of professional whining courses. To boot, illegal immigrants and large companies relocating their factories where they can get cheaper workforces cause a situation where there's excessive demand for jobs in certain fields.

Also, @dondon, BLM has their right to say whatever they want, and I will stand by it. I'd need to see whether Sander's events are classified as public or private, but appearing that easy to be pushed over is not something the leader of the strongest country in the world should look like.

[Lord Raven]

To boot, illegal immigrants and large companies relocating their factories where they can get cheaper workforces cause a situation where there's excessive demand for jobs in certain fields.

I don't see how illegal immigrants were really ever an issue at all beyond basic xenophobia.

The point is that you're saying a lot of this shit from afar, without actually having experienced it. You also haven't experienced the type of person that Trump appeals to in person - because you seem to ignore all of the completely racist fearmongering and you think he's making a grander point beyond appealing to the kind of racist asshole that he is trying to appeal to.

[Tryhard]

For example to the above, in exit poll results, 74% of Trump supporters polled believed in temporarily banning Muslims from entering the country, which Trump seems to advocate himself, is a good idea. Approximately 20% (or, at least, the ones willing to admit they do) disagreed with Lincoln freeing the slaves. ~31% are willing to say that whites are "a superior race", higher than any other candidates voting base.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/25/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-supporters-for-intolerance.html?_r=0

Edited April 7, 2016 by Tryhard

[blah the Prussian]

Okay, I'll stop you there, because by that logic you aren't allowed to have an opinion about anything you have never experienced yourself. This proposition is stupid for obvious reasons.

[tuvarkz]

I don't see how illegal immigrants were really ever an issue at all beyond basic xenophobia.

The point is that you're saying a lot of this shit from afar, without actually having experienced it. You also haven't experienced the type of person that Trump appeals to in person - because you seem to ignore all of the completely racist fearmongering and you think he's making a grander point beyond appealing to the kind of racist asshole that he is trying to appeal to.

You know illegal immigrants need to get jobs to live, right? And that because they don't have documents, they will generally end up being paid less, or will offer to work for less. This makes the situation obvious.

You think I haven't seen racists? Trust me, the average peruvian is pretty darn racist by first world standards (I will not mention examples, but it's pretty /pol/ tier in many cases except they aren't joking about it). And again, I don't bloody see where Trump is being racist. Muslims are not a race, illegal immigrants are not a race. At most you can argue that he's been pandering to them indirectly due to the fact that the other side is basically "Yay Multiculturalism is perfect", but so has Ted Cruz to some degree.

[Phoenix Wright]

From Breitbart:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/17/omnibus-funds-illegal-immigrant-resettlement-united-states/

Again, not entirely accurate, but fundamentally true. Half-truth, I'll rate it.

His tax plan seems to be obviously focusing on helping the middle class. People without a significant amount of wealth shouldn't be paying to keep those that aren't willing to work or aren't good enough to be hired afloat. Or as this guy says:

Also, historical antithesis? Oh, tell me all about the authoritarian governments the US supported all during history just because said regimes were beneficial to US's trade/economy.

aside from breitbart being a pretty shit source of information, i don't think you're interpreting either article correctly. the claim is that the omnibus funds illegal immigration. how in the fuck is this "fundamentally true"? bb notes that 1.1 bn is spent on housing illegal minors until families can be found and they'd be deported. you know, so that these people won't be dumped out into the streets and left to fend for themselves. moreover, 1 bn dollars is less than 1% of the total funding of the bill, hardly what i'd call "funding illegal immigration." it's not fundamentally true, it's wrong, and it's deception.

plus, the bill is meant to keep undocumented immigrants out lol.

again, just look at the language trump uses. it's so obviously deceptive. what do the poorest 50% (that's a lot o' people) "win"? who are they beating? billionaires could pay 99% in taxes and still be 2-3+ orders of magnitude more wealthy than those earners. you don't have a clear understanding of what it actually means to have millions of dollars, let alone billions. that's fair, but you should be doing more to understand this.

is one guy spouting bullshit supposed to prove anything. yeah, i get it, he wants a job. but it's not like the left wants to become a welfare state lol. these sorts of attacks are baseless and stupid.

those sorts of campaigns acted against what's historically been how americans feel about authoritarianism too.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Phoenix Wright

[Lord Raven]

Okay, I'll stop you there, because by that logic you aren't allowed to have an opinion about anything you have never experienced yourself. This proposition is stupid for obvious reasons.

I never said that.

The dude is looking at this from the outside in and declaring shit like how Donald Trump is exaggerating what he's saying but the point is there. The proposition is that Donald Trump is saying what he's saying to appeal to this kind of person, and he's not making a point so much as rallying the masses. Furthermore I am asserting that because he doesn't live in the US he doesn't seem to understand this idea that he is pandering because I doubt he's talked to any American or been around any American up close that thinks Donald Trump tells it like it is - because he is appealing to their irrational fears of Muslims and terrorists.

Let's not pretend that I said "you aren't qualified to make a statement about what Trump is trying to do because you don't live here." I said "you don't seem to understand this because you don't live here - and here's exactly why." People are actually buying into Trump's rhetoric for entirely racially based reasons, and other people because they're afraid of a threat that isn't even there - and therefore it's working, and therefore Trump's attitude towards everything is toxic towards the political system and this country. I argue that it's merely bringing the worst of us out of the closet, but he's turned the Republican party into even more of a shitstorm than they were in 2011-2012's primaries - and it's amazing they actually managed to top that level of crazy they had there with dudes like Herman Cain, Michael Steele, Newt Gingrich, and Donald Trump himself.

You know illegal immigrants need to get jobs to live, right? And that because they don't have documents, they will generally end up being paid less, or will offer to work for less. This makes the situation obvious.

Are you saying the issue is that they're taking jobs away from other people or that they're being treated like shit? Because your wording didn't make it obvious. I thought you said "illegal immigrants are an issue" which gave me a different impression. How they're treated is an issue, to me anyway, but not their existence otherwise.

You think I haven't seen racists? Trust me, the average peruvian is pretty darn racist by first world standards (I will not mention examples, but it's pretty /pol/ tier in many cases except they aren't joking about it). And again, I don't bloody see where Trump is being racist. Muslims are not a race, illegal immigrants are not a race. At most you can argue that he's been pandering to them indirectly due to the fact that the other side is basically "Yay Multiculturalism is perfect", but so has Ted Cruz to some degree.

Let's not mince words here. Racism and anti-islamic fear mongering go hand in hand - and it should be pretty fucking obvious I mean prejudiced. Furthermore he said "The Mexicans are coming in and they're rapists" - how the fuck does this not make him a racist?

He walked into a room full of Jewish people and said "everyone in here likes to negotiate, I can tell!" and he panders to these people just like every other candidate panders. He says whatever the fuck he wants to get elected. Cruz is starting to gain popularity? Well let me just say that we should put a ban on Muslims! That'll bring more attention to me!

On top of that, he's getting support from David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK, and he refuses to condemn them like he actually did previously, actively denying he doesn't know who the guy is or what the hell white supremacy is. Whether or not you can argue he's racist, it's still stupid shit that he's putting on a racist facade just to appeal to what amounts to the worst kind of people in America.

This tough guy act you seem to appreciate in Trump is him alienating everyone who is different than him and doesn't share his opinion. You think it's a sign of weakness to not silence someone who interrupts a rally? It's a sign of weakness to me that someone feels the need to defend the size of his dick when his hands are insulted during a presidential debate. You're supporting a dude who goes apeshit and insults anyone over the slightest provocation, and you call this a "strong" trait in a leader. No, that shit is just petty and it's the retort of a 5 year old.

To go ahead and use buzz words to describe trump; he's an edgy internet tough guy yet somehow people are enamored with him, and not because they find him funny.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Lord Raven

[Anacybele]

On the illegal immigrants thing, I believe he's saying that the issue is that they steal jobs because they can be paid less, meaning the companies hiring them don't have to spend as much money on them as they would a legal immigrant/citizen. And I agree that this can be an issue.

[Phoenix Wright]

what jobs are they stealing exactly? oh, the ones no one else applies to do anyway

[Acacia Sgt]

On the illegal immigrants thing, I believe he's saying that the issue is that they steal jobs because they can be paid less, meaning the companies hiring them don't have to spend as much money on them as they would a legal immigrant/citizen. And I agree that this can be an issue.

It's not so much that they're "stealing" the jobs, but rather, many of those jobs wouldn't exist if they weren't there in the first place to be hired for them anyway.

[eclipse]

I would say military spending should be also, but I would rather cut intelligence spending, if only to disempower the NSA, CIA, and FBI from operating without warrant.

I'd rather have laws outlining what those three-lettered agencies can and can't do. It's clear that the FBI is run by the best and the brightest (as the recent iPhone incident, which was completely avoidable, shows). Hence why I care about privacy/security issues so much - once data has been captured, there's no telling what will happen to it.

Not really, but as far as I've got it, there's a high competition job market, where most people go for massively expensive degrees in colleges when in many cases they aren't much more useful than technical training or are outright underwater basket weaving-tier of professional whining courses. To boot, illegal immigrants and large companies relocating their factories where they can get cheaper workforces cause a situation where there's excessive demand for jobs in certain fields.

Yes, that's a good issue to bring up.

So, let's see how it can end:

- Cut the worker supply: That's the illegal immigration thing. But it's more complicated than that.

- Hold corporations accountable for moving their jobs overseas: Though I think this is the better solution, I have no clue how it can be implemented to target only those businesses that use offshore resources to cut costs (and not just manufacturing, either - I'd totally hit businesses who move their support call centers overseas).

Do you think Trump will ever hold corporations accountable for how they do business?

You think I haven't seen racists? Trust me, the average peruvian is pretty darn racist by first world standards (I will not mention examples, but it's pretty /pol/ tier in many cases except they aren't joking about it). And again, I don't bloody see where Trump is being racist. Muslims are not a race, illegal immigrants are not a race. At most you can argue that he's been pandering to them indirectly due to the fact that the other side is basically "Yay Multiculturalism is perfect", but so has Ted Cruz to some degree.

. . .and building a wall along the Mexican border to keep people out is somehow NOT implying that it's the fault of the Mexicans/anyone else from that region? Because if the point is to keep jobs in the US, Trump should be looking at China/Vietnam/India/other places things are being outsourced.

---

I swear that Cruz telling a white supremacy group to fuck off with their donation shouldn't be a point in his favor. . .but with Trump running around, it is. I think this says more about the Republican party than whether either of those two should be president (hint: neither of them should).

[Alazen]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/275443-sanders-i-would-apologize-for-slavery

Here we see white guilt.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Alazen

[Person123]

The dude is looking at this from the outside in and declaring shit like how Donald Trump is exaggerating what he's saying but the point is there. The proposition is that Donald Trump is saying what he's saying to appeal to this kind of person, and he's not making a point so much as rallying the masses. Furthermore I am asserting that because he doesn't live in the US he doesn't seem to understand this idea that he is pandering because I doubt he's talked to any American or been around any American up close that thinks Donald Trump tells it like it is - because he is appealing to their irrational fears of Muslims and terrorists.

I'll just leave this right here. http://archive.is/xk9Do

Personally I don't think a temporary ban on Muslims entering the US is the right way to go about it, but completely writing off people fears they have about Islam as purely "irrational" is unfair to them.

Let's not mince words here. Racism and anti-islamic fear mongering go hand in hand - and it should be pretty fucking obvious I mean prejudiced. Furthermore he said "The Mexicans are coming in and they're rapists" - how the fuck does this not make him a racist?

The full quote as he said is thus. "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. Their rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

An argument could be made that he was talking about sending "their" rapists, not that he meant Mexicans are rapists as a whole, and if you listen to him as he's making the speech, from his inflection it's pretty clear (to me; at least) what he meant.

Personally I dislike arguing semantics, so watch a Youtube video of him making the quote and come to your own conclusion.

That said, is the point he's trying to make valid? If you actually bother to look into it, the data doesn't lie.

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm

On top of that, he's getting support from David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the KKK, and he refuses to condemn them like he actually did previously, actively denying he doesn't know who the guy is or what the hell white supremacy is. Whether or not you can argue he's racist, it's still stupid shit that he's putting on a racist facade just to appeal to what amounts to the worst kind of people in America.

He disavowed David Duke from the get go lol.

The mainstream media loves the whole "Trump is racist" narrative they're pushing. It's pretty hilarious when it blows up in their faces though.

[Phoenix Wright]

I'll just leave this right here. http://archive.is/xk9Do

Personally I don't think a temporary ban on Muslims entering the US is the right way to go about it, but completely writing off people fears they have about Islam as purely "irrational" is unfair to them.

The full quote as he said is thus. "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. Their rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

An argument could be made that he was talking about sending "their" rapists, not that he meant Mexicans are rapists as a whole, and if you listen to him as he's making the speech, from his inflection it's pretty clear (to me; at least) what he meant.

Personally I dislike arguing semantics, so watch a Youtube video of him making the quote and come to your own conclusion.

That said, is the point he's trying to make valid? If you actually bother to look into it, the data doesn't lie.

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm

He disavowed David Duke from the get go lol.

The mainstream media loves the whole "Trump is racist" narrative they're pushing. It's pretty hilarious when it blows up in their faces though.

how much of that leddit post have you actually read lol. are you trying to say that if you see a muslim in the street, you have reason to fear them or something. i can make more of an effortpost later, as of now that stuff isn't convincing. 87% of EGYPTIANS AGREE WITH AL QAEDA jesus christ

"So, statistically, like 3% or so are good, well adjusted people who happen to practice a backward religion." i mean goddamn. and you guys actively read this shit??

let's be clear, all religion is bad. islam is not without criticism, but efforts to paint an entire group of people as negatively as that is insane.

dondon, lord raven, and i have spoken ad nauseum why people in the united states don't have a reason to be afraid. i mean, should we be afraid of blacks? a fraction of them kill people. a fraction of whites kill people. why aren't we afraid of everyone?

this may come as a surprise to a number of you, but black people showing up to trump's rallies don't absolve him of the xenophobic rhetoric he continually uses.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Phoenix Wright