It's been a running joke on John Oliver's show for years:
Charlie Rose's "CBS This Morning" co-host Gayle King just happened to be a guest on Stephen Colbert's show last night. We're told she was already scheduled and, when the Rose story broke, she considered canceling, but Colbert's show is on CBS, and I assume I'm looking at CBS trying to extricate itself from the Charlie Rose story. And Gayle King isn't just committed to CBS, she's got her own reputation to keep clean. Watch the mind-numbing performance of Gayle King who plays dumb and cloyingly emotional:
1. In Colbert's introduction of King, he says she "delivers the hard news as co-anchor of 'CBS This Morning' and delivers the good news as the editor-at-large of O, the Oprah Magazine." Was "hard news" an intentional reference to Charlie Rose, whose penis is in the news? If innuendo was not intended, I believe it would have been noticed after it was written and edited out, so I say it was intended. Deniable, of course. Everything's deniable, like King's I-knew-nothing! routine.
2. Less than half-way through this clip, I was pausing and researching signs of lying. King is looking down and to her right (as if she had notes down there she needed to read) and scratching her cheek (at 2:02 (I've seen myself on video many times touching my cheek when I know I'm saying something that's has an element of deceit)). And look at her fist at 2:55.
3. "This is very difficult for me" — King's tactic is to make this a story of her emotional journey. Colbert plays a supporting role, with softball questions like: "Are you angry?" To which King answers: "I am a variety of emotions. There's certain some anger. There's some sadness. There's compassion. There's concern." It's so complex! "You can hold a variety of emotions around one particular incident."
4. At 3:52, she repositions and goes back to "what these women are going through." But what I want to know is what she knew and might have done to help "these women" before the news story broke and had an impact on her career. We have to start listening to women. King has been a professional in woman-oriented media for a long time. She didn't just recently get a clue about these issues. But the Colbert audience gives her a massive cheer (as she interlaces her fingers and works her hands back and forth).
5. Women will continue to speak up, King tells us in an impassioned tone, because "they're now being believed." She has to say "they," though she's a woman, because if she said "we," it would seem as though she had a story to tell.
6. King says that men need to "join the conversation." How? Men have to condemn sexual harassment and not make fine distinctions. They have to say that "it's all bad." So... not really a conversation. "All of it is really unacceptable." There's nothing to debate. Oh, but then she says, "By the same token, I want to be able to joke and laugh with friends without thinking I'm going to be called into human resources. But we all know the difference. What that is. We do." We do? Is it that talking is different and you can joke? But look at the most famous joke on the subject: "And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything, grab them by the pussy, you can do anything." That has plainly been dumped into the all-of-it-is-really-unacceptable category. (No wonder Siri is telling me, "Ann, I don't really know any good jokes. None, in fact." It is the Era of That's Not Funny.") [AND: As Ignorance is Bliss asks in the comments: "So who put a pubic hair on my Coke?"]
And here's Gayle King talking about the Rose story with Norah O'Donnell on their show, "CBS This Morning" yesterday:
That's very stiff and stilted. The 2 women are scripted to say what's been decided as the correct way to save their show. It goes on and on, and I'm saying that after stopping the clip at 2:12. There's no way, no matter how much longer they talk — the clip goes on for another minute — they are not going to get to the topic I want to hear discussed: What did you know? If you didn't know, why didn't you know? What good are you in your women-helping-women role on morning TV if you didn't recognize the monster who sat next to you for 5 years?
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८२ टिप्पण्या:
There is an element of female privilege in your being able to write this. Proving that privilege is not always a bad thing. There are some things that male privileges do not allow.
Journalists are supposed to see the truth. They self identify as Feminists. They saw him EVERY DAY.
What way do they wiggle to make them seem as anything but incompetent, credulous or covering?
That is quite the needle to thread.
Gayle knew, Norah knew, plenty of staff knew.
Glad Rose got fired from multiple jobs.
They all disgust me.
John Oliver was right about something?
By the same token, I want to be able to joke and laugh with friends without thinking I'm going to be called into human resources. But we all know the difference. What that is. We do.
So who put a pubic hair on my Coke?
But we all know the difference.
Except for the last 20 years when it came to Bill Clinton, where doing a national debate "we" were told "we" didn't know what "we" were talking about and "we" should just go back to our lives because it was "just sex".
So the history of which she is very much a part of does not support her point.
And people in the media like Stephen Colbert are not going to call her on it, because it undermines the idea that these highly educated pretty people can continue to tell us how best to live our lives.
Yes, comedy is dead. So is the news. So is the entertainment world. Why bother detailing it any longer. Just shovel the dirt on the coffin and say a prayer. Much better things to do than wallow in all this.
As to jokes, I can assure you my wife and I and friends have had belly laughs galore over all of this nonsense. We are trying and failing to see what it has to do with any of us. "Toxic Masculinity"? Not a bit of it in sight in my circle. How about yours. But of course we'd be up on charges if we shared half of what we say on "social" media (as the laughable phrase has it). As "social" as one of those two-minute hates, except it's ever second of the day. But comedy isalive and well, as I am sure most here know also.
It is incumbent on men to appreciate more and to do more and have the same responsibilities that women do. - Charlie Rose
So I guess this means that we have to sexually satisfy our bosses too. Whodathunkit?
But you know who is still funny? He whom I shall not be the first to name in this thread.
Finally a way to make Boringheads bearable. Finding Alt-lies seems sorta like a Waldo thing.
I used to like to listen to comedy, watch the specials, but now comedy is like war, politics by other means. Same as most television shows. When I still, once in a great while, turned on the Simpsons, I got the feeling that if they didn't have a story idea, they just dialed up the DNC and asked them what to do a show about.
Much like her reading the New York Times so that I don't have to, I'm grateful that Althouse watches Colbert so that I don't have to.
Lol. I wrote "Colbert" when I should have written "Oliver." Are there any funny late night shows anymore?
With all that sexual banter, no wonder he thought women were up for grabs, so to speak. The work environment seems to have fostered the behavior. In your second clip, you can hear Nora ODonnell warn that he knows how to use his hands. Will part of the reforms at CBS be to not treat sex so casually?
I'm waiting for some young woman to accuse Gayle King.
I have a dream that some day Gayle King will tell the truth.
She’s just covering for the liberal media.
I’m guessing Roy Moore wins now. At least he kept his clothes on.
They're not good fakers, are they?
Whenever a prog says something like "starting a conversation" or "joining a conversation", I can't help but think of the great Gene Hackman as Harry Caul in "The Conversation". Methinks that Harry would say: 'Not another conversation! I'm so done with conversations!"
Gorillas in their Midst.
I am Laslo.
And no one who had reached the top in the media/entertainment areas was willing to speak out about these people. The Tom Hanks, Will Smiths, Tom Cruises, Meryl Streeps, Oprahs, etc. And the Clintons, and very likely the Obamas, as well. Clearly they were all aware of what has been going on, and they are all at the point in their careers where they could have safely said something. And all chose not to.
It's about men in general and women's general resentment of their sexual interest, not about celebrity. Celebrity is just the focus for a women's anger mob entertainment. Ratings. Mob action.
Sexual jokes are a standard, not evidence of creepiness and coverups.
Sexual jokes are exposures of a difference between two states men find themselves in with regard to women. Women don't find it funny because they don't experience it.
Men know they are saps half the time. Women always think they're serious people.
After watching, I only wonder this: How many times did Gayle and Norah have to fuck that old perv Charlie?
The cognitive dissonance between what these women are saying and and what they knew is jarring. Rumors abound in these situations. The victims always tell someone, often someone in authority who really doesn't want to deal with the situation directly. Megyn Kelly says she complained to her boss about Roger Ailes, and he told her to stay away from Ailes, and there were no further problems. O'Donnell and King are lying.
Twenty years ago Norah was HOT. Really hot. Now she looks like plastic, no?
Heard footage of Charlie Rose trying to shame Steve Bannon over Trump.
Rose is a hack. He gave Hillary a tongue bath.
What did Gayle and Norah know and when did they know it?
The truth is coming out. Our Top Men want and expect orgies with beautiful young women, all the time. Whether Charlie Rose or Bill Clinton or JFK or Bertrand Russell or Edward Prince of Wales. Who knew?
And now our Top Men are new and improved, with Viagra.
In a time of universal offense, humor is a revolutionary act.
"He gave Hillary a tongue bath."
My cat wouldn't give Hillary a tongue bath even if you dipped her in Lil Friskies.
"iqvoice said...
After watching, I only wonder this: How many times did Gayle and Norah have to fuck that old perv Charlie?"
Have to? Or did?
Do you think Charlie Rose is a monster? That seems like hyperbole. He is an insufferably smug lecherous man and I don't mind seeing his downfall mostly because he is a liar and hypocrite, but monster, no.
I thought Gayle King handled this fairly well. Not sure what Althouse is complaining about.
Curious George said...
"He gave Hillary a tongue bath."
My cat wouldn't give Hillary a tongue bath even if you dipped her in Lil Friskies.
Your cat isn't a journolist.
"Men know they are saps half the time."
I don't think men just know this. It has to be learned from introspection, which many men (especially the young and the stupid) are not good at.
In your second clip, you can hear Nora ODonnell warn that he knows how to use his hands. Will part of the reforms at CBS be to not treat sex so casually?
King and O'Donnell knew, of course they knew, they'd have to be idiots not to know.
They didn't get to where they are by being idiots. They did, however, help secure their positions by being quiet about it.
They are such frauds, the lot of them. But yeah let's have a conversation, I'm all up for that.
"John Oliver was right about something?"
Well, yes...as so often before!
Do you think that, after Norah and Gayle leave their chairs, that any stagehands go and sniff the seats?
Because I bet some stagehands go and sniff the seats.
I am Laslo.
King and O'Donnell knew, of course they knew, they'd have to be idiots not to know.
What they knew is that men like women sexually. The details were owed civil inattention.
But it's a big play today, so civil inattention is out. Women reject men liking women sexually, until the entertainment value falls back again to lost ratings.
Resentment, grudges and suspicions are part of the design deal in sexuality. It's what same sex marriage lacks. There's nothing to domesticate.
The always truthful Blazing Saddles reference...
John Oliver was right about something?
Doubtful. Well he did marry a US military veteran, but that's the only time.
"I thought Gayle King handled this fairly well. Not sure what Althouse is complaining about."
Yes, I agree. We can't know what she knew. It's very possible she knew some or much about Rose's lechery, but it's also possible she knew nothing of it. How much do each of us know about people we work with every day? There are people I've worked with for years and I have no idea what their lives outside work are like, whether they have spouses or partners, what they do in their off time, etc.
However, even assuming King knew something of Rose's behavior, or had at least heard rumors, she came across with Colbert as honest and open. Maybe she's a good liar, maybe she's not lying at all. However, one can't infer she's being deceitful because she scratched her cheek at one point just because one has done that oneself when being less than truthful.
You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of these TV personalities into what I call the basket of deplorables.
Christopher said...
King and O'Donnell knew, of course they knew
Charlie Rose's transgressions seem to have largely involved employees of his private company, not CBS or PBS, so it is not necessarily the case that they knew. The video is certainly not evidence for this. They are performing in front of millions of viewers, they believed that they were being a little risqué, not outing a sexual predator.
I can’t help wondering how Rose felt in recent weeks as he reported the snowballing stories of sexual improprieties. Did he think it was only a matter of time before the bell tolled for him or did he imagine he’d escape the avalanche?
Finding their religion.
She had to know he wasn't wearing any pants during all those interviews. I mean that's a red flag right there.
Rose started every conversation with "Who wants a fingerbang?" They had to know.
I used to think that the phrase “court of public opinion” referred to some kind of house of law, but I’m starting to think it’s more like a royal court now. The public stands outside the courtroom making opinions about what we suspect is going on in there.
This article at Counterpunch today describes some of my own misgivings about the flood of accusations of impropriety, followed by the swift casting out of the accused into the negative zone...along with the jobs of so many other people who worked with and for the accused offenders, without careful consideration of the different levels of impropriety or offense that have been alleged.
I ran across a term which describes these people:
"Casebearers" live in a "case constructed of their fecal matter and sometimes plant debris. Eggs are laid in carefully sculpted packets formed from feces and abdominal secretions."
Charlie Rose's transgressions seem to have largely involved employees of his private company, not CBS or PBS, so it is not necessarily the case that they knew.
Well. Largely. Charlie Rose Accused of Sexual Harassment by three CBS Employees.
Even if this were not the case, I'm not going to buy the claim that in this tiny incestuous world of elite media that these were stunning out-of-character transgressions that no one knew anything about. That's not how the world works. When King and O'Donnell start talking about how This Shall Not Stand and we need to have a conversation, I'm going to point and laugh.
"We can't know what she knew."
So you don't believe her when she says she didn't know?
All depends on what the meaning of "knew" is.
Progs on progs: wir haben es nicht gewusst. (Referring to King, not Cook. Apologies/compliments to Mike Godwin.)
I'm sorry Charlie. We have to let you go.
But...I bought these pants...I put them on...
I know Charlie, but it's out of my hands...um...they look nice though.
Do think so? It feels weird...you know...after going so long...
You'll get used to them.
I ordered another pair, but they haven't come yet.
Well...good luck Charlie.
Robert Cook said...
some of my own misgivings
I think the Weinstein case has been a watershed because it illustrates the problem so starkly. Weinstein is obviously a disturbed sociopath, but he was so entrenched in the business that even his own brother couldn't get him to change his behavior towards female employees. The business was extremely hierarchical and the voices of the women were generally not heard or effectively silenced from the top. Clearly this is unacceptable. The current blood letting is a step towards what will hopefully be a better and safer world for women in the workplace. I wouldn't put money on this happening but it is certainly the goal.
"my own misgivings about the flood of accusations of impropriety, followed by the swift casting out of the accused into the negative zone...along with the jobs of so many other people who worked with and for the accused offenders, without careful consideration of the different levels of impropriety or offense that have been alleged."
I share those misgivings. But that's not how prog-instigated witch hunts work. The Sacco Syndrome turned up to 11.
Embarassing, but my partner watched their show a lot, and esp for Rose. Gayle has apparently always been a partisan hack, and since Trump was elected, Norah has exposed herself as being almost as bad. Charlie though was charming and was the most likely to give the conservative side of an issue a (more) fair shake. Still too left wing gor her, despite her protestations that they, or at least Charlie, tried. So, of late she has been watching old reruns of Little Joe On The Prarie instead.
These two knew about Charlie and his womanizing. Gayle is apparently fairly close to him personally, and his outrageous flirting with women was a running thing on the show. Partner remembers one time about a discussion between him and Norah at home in her nightgown (or whatever). There was apparent some subtle sexual suggestions on his part.
That said, my partner gives him a lot of leeway here. Some guys are just flirts. Her father and uncle were maybe worse than Rose, but he is pretty outrageous. Her mother set the line before she was born - he can look and talk, but not touch. Ever, and if he ever did, could expect an immediate neutering. She was a dancer, and the years of training makes a kick there trivial. I know it well, as her middle daughter, brought up dancing, does the same to me, demonstrating on occasion that she still has very precise control of such. I think that it was that continuous flirting that reminded her a bit of her father with Rose.
The other part of her feelings here come from the other thing that she did growing up, and through college, and that was modeling. There, it is routine for women to be throwing themselves at powerful men, willingly sleeping with them to get ahead. From everything that we have heard about the entertainment world, this is ubiquitous there. This is the elephant in the room - that a great many of the women tying to get ahead in these fields will do what it takes to get ahead, and that often includes sex. And, yes, there are also a lot of women out there who are truly "star struck". Who revel in having having had sex with famous guys. Which she saw a lot of in Vegas as she entered adulthood - women hanging around her just for the famous people that she could connect them with, and then bed. So, you have a courtly older gentleman who is on the air a lot, who is an inveterate flirt, and how do you think the numbers worked out for him? My guess yesterday was that of every 100 women that he suggested something with, maybe a third went along with it, most of the rest just removed his hand from their leg and went on, with only one or two, if that many, objecting. What did they expect when they went to his room alone? Over the years, she had plenty of offers or suggestions along those lines. She refused, insisting on meeting in a public place instead, or bringing along another woman. And when the guy put his hand on her leg, or otherwise showed sexual interest, she removed it, and in 99% of the cases, that was it. This isn't most typically sexual harassment on their part, but rather guys just being guys, being the sexual aggressors, because that is what nature required of them.
Christopher said...
Well. Largely.
As noted in the article, none of these women said anything until Rose was safely removed from the workplace, which is an indictment of the current system but exculpatory for King and Norah O'Donnell.
@Robert Cook - Thanks for the link.
"By the same token, I want to be able to joke and laugh with friends without thinking I'm going to be called into human resources. But we all know the difference. What that is. We do."
Bullshit. This is race, not sex, but: my husband referred to something as a 'goat rodeo,' someone ratted him out to HR, and he got a talking to about his 'anti-Middle Eastern remarks.' That is obviously a total misunderstanding of the phrase, which a quick trip to Urban Dictionary and a little think about whether a 'rodeo' is an Arab cultural practice would have cleared up, but that was no protection at all. There would likewise be no protection against misattributed 'sexual' remarks.
It's clear that . . . this is a moment.
I don't follow late night TV so correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Colbert in David Letterman's old slot?
Has Colbert or anyone else addressed the (apparently) rampant intern-fucking behavior of Letterman? Isn't that, you know, another of those "everyone knew" type of stories where there are plenty of people who've talked about aspects of Letterman's behavior over the years?
Seems like he's more than a bit overdue for a reckoning. If these people were serious, anyway. Which, you know, they aren't.
I dunno. When did watching hens cluck in the yard become news/entertainment?
Cookie: "This article at Counterpunch today describes some of my own misgivings about the flood of accusations of impropriety, followed by the swift casting out of the accused into the negative zone...along with the jobs of so many other people who worked with and for the accused offenders, without careful consideration of the different levels of impropriety or offense that have been alleged"
"Truthful" Cook: This witch hunt/War on Women stuff was great when it was being used exclusively against republicans. But now, this thing we unleashed and empowered and cheered on and enabled has suddenly turned against its masters so naturally it must be rethought for "nuanced" analysis of dems, i.e. ARM standard practice.
I've never watched any of these people on TV.
Has Colbert or anyone else addressed the (apparently) rampant intern-fucking behavior of Letterman?
Nope.
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/11/22/david-letterman-received-mark-twain-prize-despite-past-scrutiny-over-sexual-misconduct.html
From Wikipedia article on Stephanie Birkitt (former Late Show intern):
On October 1, 2009, Letterman announced on-air that he had been the victim of an extortion attempt in which an alleged blackmailer—since identified by police as CBS television producer Joe Halderman—threatened to reveal that Letterman had engaged in sexual affairs with multiple female employees.[18] Letterman said that the allegation was true, but did not reveal the names of or any identifying information about the female employees.[18] Soon afterward, the extortionist was identified by media as a former boyfriend of Birkitt, and anonymous sources alleged that Birkitt and Letterman has had a sexual relationship.[18]
Birkitt reportedly was neither aware of nor involved in the blackmail attempt.[19][20][21] According to CBS News, Birkitt and the CBS News producer Joe Halderman lived together in Halderman's Norwalk, Connecticut, home until August 2009, when she reportedly moved out; she was also romantically linked to Letterman during the same time. The New York Post broke a story on October 6 that Birkitt had an affair with Letterman, which continued during her relationship with Halderman.[22][23] Copies of Birkitt's diary, as well as emails between her and Letterman, were reportedly the basis of the blackmail package allegedly placed in Letterman's car by Halderman.[24]
My bold. Here's some irony:
Al Franken Cut from Letterman's Mark Twain Prize Broadcast
Anyway my larger point is that if hitting on and banging interns (while married, naturally) is a problem then seems like the Media types should have a bit more to say about Letterman.
If they meant it.
Which, you know, they don't.
I salute the women of SNL. They have a zero tolerance policy towards zero tolerance. I hope this catches on and becomes a movement. The Hypocrisy Liberation Front. Nothing is more basic to human nature, even more basic than our sex drive, than to be hypocritical about our libidos. It's what makes us fully human........Like the girls at SNL, I have decided that the best way to evaluate the morals of my favorite performer is to take into account how much I like them. I've decided to give Harrison Ford a pass on that thing about hand delivering an Oscar to Polanski. Why? Because I like his movies. So far as Meryl Streep and her standing ovation for Polanski? That's unforgivable........The infinite nuances and interlaces of sex, behavior, and morality are so much easier to navigate if you commit yourself to the path of hypocrisy
I guarantee on the Letterman topic it'll be back to "consenting adults! Consenting adults!" and #MoveOn(.org)
Probably they'll sprinkle in some "it was 20 years ago" stuff like they do with BJ Clinton, too.
Gayle knows all about being beholden to a powerful person. In her case though, it's a woman.
Gayle and Norah say that the remedy is to have women in power. Don't they wield a certain amount of power? Didn't Rose have a woman producer? Harvey used women to set up his assignations. In my experience women are not spectacularly more moral than men........My solution would be to have a Daily Caller journalist on the set with full access to HR records. At Fox, they could have a Daily Beast reporter with similar access.
William: "The infinite nuances and interlaces of sex, behavior, and morality are so much easier to navigate if you commit yourself to the path of hypocrisy"
Brilliant.
The fact that hypocrisy is hard-wired into all of us makes your observations eternally true.
Concurrently, hypocrisy IS one of those things that we are obligated to strive against to the best of our abilities.
AReasonableMan said...I thought Gayle King handled this fairly well. Not sure what Althouse is complaining about.
I won't speak for the Professor but my complaint is the ridiculously softball nature oft he "interview." It's easy to "handle it well" when you're on the same team and working towards the same goal--of getting sympathetic people to say "she handled that well" without much additional thought.
Robert Cook said...
This article at Counterpunch today describes some of my own misgivings about the flood of accusations of impropriety, followed by the swift casting out of the accused into the negative zone...along with the jobs of so many other people who worked with and for the accused offenders, without careful consideration of the different levels of impropriety or offense that have been alleged.
Men accused of sexual misconduct and/or rape while at college could not be reached for comment, I guess.
People see what they want to see. They want to get along and not rock the boat. As long as they are not personally affected they allow abuse to happen and say nothing. What annoys me, as Ann infers, is the absurdity that such dishonest people are reporting the news and presume to inform the rest of us of what we should know and think. They are only actors who are playing the role of journalists. Total fakes. Fake news. Exposed.
I never watched that program, CBS in the Morning, only saw Rose on his Charlie Rose Show where he maintained a serious demeanor. I can honestly say I was surprised by the accusations about him. But after seeing how creepy he behaved in a lighter venue, I can't imagine that Gayle King and Nora O'Donnell are actually shocked or surprised in the least by what he did in private. Guilty as charged.
AReasonableMan said...
The current blood letting is a step towards what will hopefully be a better and safer world for women in the workplace.
Those Poor Little Dears - I hope that someday they'll have the joke-free Safe Spaces they so richly deserve.
"93% of deaths on the job involved men"
R. J. Chatt said, I never watched that program, CBS in the Morning, only saw Rose on his Charlie Rose Show where he maintained a serious demeanor. I can honestly say I was surprised by the accusations about him.
Seriously, and a propos of the topic at hand, another of our endless human challenges is our gullibility. Almost everyone on TV is acting, friends: acting. They are playing a role which may or may not reflect their actual nature, personality, and honesty.
Having been around California politics and media for years, it is my own experience that it's almost always and entirely an act. So who the hell knows, from personal experience and judgment, whether there is any validity to the show we are being presented?
So not only do we have our own tendencies to hypocrisy to be on the lookout for, but also our projections which the visual media so adroitly and endlessly hook into.
I've seen myself on video many times touching my cheek when I know I'm saying something that's has an element of deceit.
This is by far the most interesting sentence in your post -- do tell more about the need for deceit in your life.
Regarding the first video you posted:
How Vulgarity Normalizes Predators, by Leah Libresco Sargeant.
Bill - very interesting article. Well worth reading. Thanks!
So, Rose has been deemed not a "person" and summarily denied due process. Abort/Plan him NOW.
I am sure that there are women who happily took advantage of Charlie Rose's advances to advance their careers. Women who use their sexuality to get ahead (including just flirting) need to be addressed too--the men aren't going to stop if these women don't stop. Right now the narrative is all about blaming the men. But I have seen plenty of women behave inappropriately too. I also think that Gayle and Nora knew about Charlie and I did not believe that the outrage they displayed on the morning show yesterday was genuine.
It's like those women drove the getaway car when Rose robbed the liquor store.
They need to go, the same way he did. Bring in a new cast and pray nothing comes out about them.
Reason 1001 why I don't watch TV news
So, the greatest news gathering and reporting organization in the history of news had no clue. Perhaps Dan Rather could've doctored some evidence for them.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा