I got to that via a WaPo piece titled "Jeffrey Toobin to his former professor Alan Dershowitz: ‘What’s happened to you?,'" which makes it seem as though Toobin got the better of Dershowitz, which is certainly not how I would score it. The clip ends with Dershowitz giving a definitive defense of himself as consistent on rule-of-law arguments: "I’m not carrying [Trump's] water. I’m saying the exact same thing I’ve said for 50 years. And Jeffrey, you ought to know that, you were my student.The fact that it applies to Trump now rather than applying to Bill Clinton is why people like you have turned against me."
In the WaPo article, but not in the clip:
“None of my liberal friends invite me to dinner anymore,” he said. “Thanks to Donald Trump, I’ve lost seven pounds. I call it the Donald Trump diet.”Just use the other Donald Trump diet: McDonald's. But I love the (presumably humorous) notion that the only way for a liberal elitist to get fed is by inclusion in dinner parties.
पोस्ट्स
९१ टिप्पण्या:
"But I love the (presumably humorous) notion that the only way for a liberal elitist to get fed is by inclusion in dinner parties."
He didn't say that at all. Dinner parties typically have "fancy" food that is high in fat and calories. And deserts. and booze.
That's how fascist leftists roll. The law isn't applied evenly, and the vicious blackmail that comes after, Toobin style, it's coming.
I don't know about anybody else, but I have had it up to [draws line at eyeball level with finger] HERE with the whole "one set of rules for you and another for me" schtick, and I'm glad that Dershowitz calls Toobin out on that.
I watched it live last night. Note well; when asked if there is now good reason to shut down the Special Counsel investigation (since Dershowitz had said -- as was blogged by Althouse -- that he thought that there never should have been the appointment of a special counsel), Dershowitz stated in no uncertain terms that it should absolutely NOT be shut down now.
Even prog friendships require political correctness. No decent prog wants to associate with monstrous evil.
For progs, law is just a tool. The only question is who gets to use it.
Honest liberalism is therefore the worst sin. What happened to you is prelude to vilification.
First, no more dinner parties; down the line, reeducation camps and the gulag. (Kidding, I hope.)
I'm glad I'm not one of those fancy-pants TV guys. I bet they shave every day.
"I call it the Donald Trump diet."
You know who else had a diet, don't you?
How many special counsels were appointed under Obama to cure conflicts between Holder/Lycnch and other Obama cronies?
Was putting the Clinton email "matter" in the hands of Comey, McCabe and Struck the only example where the special counsel process was eschewed by the Obama AG?
They're fighting over the moralizing high ground.
One of the few ways to move out from under a good teacher's shadow is to take a stance contrary to that of the teacher.
If the contrary view is well-argued, a good teacher shows respect.
If the contrary view is wishes and wordplay then the good teacher schools you.
When the good teacher then schools you in public you have a choice:
Up your game.
or
Be revealed as a little boy.
Toobin wants Dershowitz's love, but his opposition works, too: it gives him the feeling that he is a Big Boy Now.
Men in intellectual Shorts.
The Germans have a word for this.
The diet of worms was always my favorite.
Dershowitz prevails on any objective scale. Easily. Most media outlets will, of course, highlight the personal insult as some type of epic take down. By the way, I read several law/law school related books before entering law school in 2008 at the age of 48. Alan Dershowitz's Letters to a Young Lawyer was my favorite.
Toobin is not a great legal brain, he's a hack(D).
If the contrary view is well-argued, a good teacher shows respect.
As Dershowitz has done for his former-pupil Ted Cruz.
Master 1, Student 0
This is like Barry Bonds debating how to hit big league pitching with an outta shape yuppie in a San Francisco lawyer softball league.
The demonization of Alan D accelerates.
Fair warning to any on the left who get a momentary urge to play fair.
Honest question: Does anyone - outside of knee-jerk liberals - think Jeffery T is a brilliant legal scholar?
What Dershowitz gets, and Toobin doesn’t is that you make a name for yourself by swimming against the current, not with it.
Which must be why spellcheck knew to complete Dershowitz after only 4 letters,, but never figured out Toobin.
Judy Garland in "black face", that's who.
Just use the other Donald Trump diet: McDonald's. But I love the (presumably humorous) notion that the only way for a liberal elitist to get fed is by inclusion in dinner parties.
That's not what I inferred from that remark. Rather that there is a tendency to overeat when invited out than when eating in.
Toobin labels Dersh "partisan" for not being partisan toward Democrats. This is the role model who knocked up Jeff Greenfield's daughter while he was married to someone else.
Im surprised CNN could even break away from its breathless coverage of Stormy Daniels to cover this exchange.
Jeffery Toobin acted like the little bitch he is...
“Alan what’s happened to you, you’re carrying water for Trump”
What a putz....
Don’t they pay you Con Law professors enough to buy groceries? I guess Meade married you for love.
I wonder when the ALCU is going to revoke Dershowitz’s card?
They’re fighting over the moralizing high ground.
I have thought that for some time, it’s all “King of the Mountain.”
Proving, yet again, that it is liberals who are not open-minded enough to see the other side. Sensitive, welcoming, tolerant. None applies to the left.
Fernandistein askd...You know who else had a diet, don't you?
Dunna Leanham?
Dinner parties typically have "fancy" food that is high in fat and calories. And deserts. and booze.
The good ones have booze. The only okay ones have beer.
TDC
Good name for a law firm.
IMHO.
I agree that the special counsel will have to run its course now but also agree that the whole affair is an example of the Deep State trying to reject the assault of the smelly deplorable voters into its sacrosanct environs where only those anointed, in Thomas Sowelll's term, are allowed to enter.
This is Nixon redux with the difference that Trump is rich and doesn't give a shit what they think.
Nixon was taken down with the assistance of members of his staff., Trump fires staff. Nixon hated to fire anyone, as did Reagan.
"MadisonMan said...
Dinner parties typically have "fancy" food that is high in fat and calories. And deserts. and booze.
The good ones have booze. The only okay ones have beer."
Yep. But frankly Dersh didn't say "parties", that's an Althouse add. He said "dinner"...could be a party, or even out at a restaurant...another place with high caolric and generally high fat dishes...deserts, and booze.
Not edited:
http://therightscoop.com/full-interview-cnns-jeffrey-toobin-accuses-alan-dershowitz-of-carrying-water-for-trump-in-epic-interview/
Toobin starts by saying Flynn "lied to the FBI" which is not proven. The fact that he copped a plea means only that he was running out of money and was offered a deal on a process "crime" which is not part of any conspiracy to collude with Russia. It has been sold to the public as such but the truth is trickling out.
There was a meta-thing that I thought was great about this segment.
There was Anderson Cooper in the middle, but after he asked about two questions, the whole thing was an unmoderated interchange between Dershowitz and Toobin. And neither one of them did much to interrupt the other, or to try to do that cable tv news thing of talking over each other. Point made, followed by counterpoint, followed by response, followed by reply. It was so much better than average cable "news."
I know this quotation has been posted in this forum before, but it sure seems appropriate now:
And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake.
From A Man For All Seasons (1966)
I think President Trump should issue two executive orders, effective immediately.
1) The Special Counsel investigation is terminated.
2) Every document in the Special Counsel's possession is declassified and released to the public.
So here's the question Chuck... In your opinion, just how long should we allow Mueller's open-ended witch-hunt to continue? For the rest of Trump's presidency? Its now going on 2 years that Trump has been spied on and has had FBI / DOJ / NSA / CIA combing over every facet of his business and personal life, looking for SOMETHING / ANYTHING!!! they can use to bring him down... and still nothing... At what point do reasonable people get to say, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and tell Mueller to go pound sand? Or are you perfectly fine with the government being allowed to harass and investigate someone in perpetuity simply because of their political affiliation?
"Men in intellectual Shorts.
The Germans have a word for this."
Lederhosen?
Point made, followed by counterpoint, followed by response, followed by reply. It was so much better than average cable "news."
The only cable news that I watch once in a while is Fox and this drives me nuts about them.
My wife watches and I see it walking through the room. I do watch Tucker Carlson sometimes, though.
The reality is that Hillary Clinton, and her loyalists, are gaslighting us.
"2) Every document in the Special Counsel's possession is declassified and released to the public."
Grand Jury testimony is secret and cannot be released.
If the Post's summary is accurate, Toobin is simply talking past Dershowitz-- whose point is that, so far as we know thus far, there is no crime to be investigated. To reply that a special counsel was needed because Sessions has a conflict of interest which prevents him conducting the investigation himself, is nonresponsive to Dershowitz's argument. If there shouldn't be a criminal investigation at all (as opposed to a counterintelligence probe), then it doesn't matter whather Sessions in a position to direct a criminal investigation.
"When the good teacher then schools you in public you have a choice:
Up your game.
or
Be revealed as a little boy."
Ahh, this explains so much. Maybe ARM needs a lollipop and some arcade tickets.
"Or are you perfectly fine with the government being allowed to harass and investigate someone in perpetuity simply because of their political affiliation?"
For Chuck, it's not about political affiliation at this point. It's about the surname. Anyone with the surname of Trump is deserving of unending investigation and harassment by the media and the Democrats. Blind hatred is an ugly thing.
At 2:30 in the video, Dershowitz says we need a special part of the Justice Department, a permanent part, that is apolitical to investigate the President. This is nonsense. There is a horrible idea.
There is no apolitical part of the government. Our judicial branch, which is supposed to be apolitical, is full of people that are driven by politics.
The practical impact of such an agency would be to overrule democracy. The left could nullify elections through such a mechanism. And that would be the practical impact because given human nature and the strong push towards conformity that most people feel and the fact that the left disproportionately feels this force, this means that the left will almost always comes to dominate institutions because they are the strongest minority, since they are relatively unified, and then given that most institutions are winner take-all games, that means everyone that is not left-wing gets wiped out.
Silly rabbit Dershowitz still thinks that election politics is not criminal. So does Toobin, except for when Hillary gets mad at her team for losing. That makes every word spoken by Trump and his team before, during and after the election into a High Crime...maybe fraud against the Clinton Government. It must be a crime to steal an election that she had already paid good money and had people killed to have rigged.
Toobin looks like a defeated man. Cooper looks like he knows Toobin is defeated.
Dershowitz can come to my house for dinner any time.
Chuck said...
Dershowitz stated in no uncertain terms that it should absolutely NOT be shut down now.
In his op-ed in the TheHill, he stated his view that Mueller's investigation should be suspended pending a determination by a bipartisan fact-finding commission (ala the 9/11 commission and others) that crimes were committed, and those crimes (if any) be referred to Mueller. He did not say that Mueller should be allowed to continue his fishing expedition indefinitely.
Toobin, who shilled relentlessly for Obama, accuses Dershowitz of shilling for Trump, and gets schooled. Love it.
-sw
Dersh is a treasure. He is exactly right about Toobins flip flop.
Joshua Barker said...
So here's the question Chuck... In your opinion, just how long should we allow Mueller's open-ended witch-hunt to continue? For the rest of Trump's presidency? Its now going on 2 years that Trump has been spied on and has had FBI / DOJ / NSA / CIA combing over every facet of his business and personal life, looking for SOMETHING / ANYTHING!!! they can use to bring him down... and still nothing... At what point do reasonable people get to say, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and tell Mueller to go pound sand? Or are you perfectly fine with the government being allowed to harass and investigate someone in perpetuity simply because of their political affiliation?
My view on the whole investigation issue is, I think, the same as Trey Gowdy's. And Gowdy was an assistant U.S. Attorney, and may someday be a Judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If I were president, he might be my attorney general.
Basically, Gowdy thinks Mueller is doing a good job, he doesn't think of the investigation as a "WITCH HUNT!", and he does not think it should be shut down.
Trey Gowdy is not, and never has been, any sort of Democrat-sympathizer.
Dershowitz says we need a special part of the Justice Department, a permanent part, that is apolitical to investigate the President.
This is what the Inspector General is and does although he investigates all the Justice Department.
Let's just leave it at that. I will be very interested in that report.
Trey Gowdy is not, and never has been, any sort of Democrat-sympathizer.
Maybe not, but he's become the epitome of the GOPe MSM sycophant. His statement criticizing Trump's lawyer ("If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it") was completely ridiculous, is if it's inappropriate for one's lawyer to try to end a bogus investigation.
A soi-disant liberal who un-friends someone because of Hillary getting her comeuppance is hardly a liberal, is he? That kind of behavior is more totalitarian (which one may interpret as fascistic) than liberal.
What's worse than Jeffery Toobin's betrayal of liberalism is that he evidently doesn't give a shit that he has done so. Liberals are sometimes described as wearing their hearts on their sleeves — kinda like armbands, we surmise.
"Liberals" haven't been liberal since the 1950s, if even then.
"Men in intellectual Shorts."
Exactly. Toobin is the veritable definition of a lightweight. Interestingly, he's also very much an old-school Establishment reactionary, though he would no doubt be shocked to be called such.
James K: "Maybe not, but he's become the epitome of the GOPe MSM sycophant. His statement criticizing Trump's lawyer ("If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it") was completely ridiculous, is if it's inappropriate for one's lawyer to try to end a bogus investigation."
I believe that Gowdy is playing the "long game" and is working to establish a clear rhetorical line of independence from the Trump Administration and to appear as a strong supporter of Mueller.
If you believe that Gowdy is laying the foundation for a future appointment as Attorney General or senior member of the DOJ (for instance, key roles in South Carolina).
You need to also keep in mind that Gowdy has already stated publicly that the current set of known facts regarding the shenanigans at DOJ/FBI require a second Special Counsel.
My view on the whole investigation issue is, I think, the same as Trey Gowdy's. And Gowdy was an assistant U.S. Attorney, and may someday be a Judge of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If I were president, he might be my attorney general.
Basically, Gowdy thinks Mueller is doing a good job, he doesn't think of the investigation as a "WITCH HUNT!", and he does not think it should be shut down.
Trey Gowdy is not, and never has been, any sort of Democrat-sympathizer.
3/22/18, 10:27 AM
--------------------
And you didn't answer my question Chuck... How **LONG** do **YOU** think this type of open-ended investigation should be allowed to continue? When there has been ZERO EVIDENCE of ANY CRIMINAL WRONGDOING?!?!? If this was anyone else, this would have been shut down AGES ago... But because its Trump, its somehow OK to just continue digging through his life, going back YEARS before he was even a candidate...
This is the kind of thing that occurs in Fascist / Stalinist / Banana Republics... We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, and our legal system is NOT supposed to be allowed to investigate you and every aspect of your life for eternity until they find something they can use to destroy you, WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF AN ACTUAL CRIME BEING COMMITTED!!!!
What crime, specifically, do you allege that Donald Trump is guilty of that justifies a NEVER-ENDING investigation, designed solely to hamstring a sitting President, and what EVIDENCE do you provide to back up your claims? Please be specific...
I believe that Gowdy is playing the "long game"
No doubt, but a distinction without a difference. That's what Republican "top men" do: Throw "controversial" (meaning conservative) Republicans under the bus today so they can keep themselves "respectable." Don't fight for a cause, just look out for number one.
There's a lot about Gowdy to like, but on this topic he's wrong.
-sw
Saves him the monotony of sour grapes.
Just more symptoms of a decadent intellectual culture.
There is no shortage of those.
Toobin is just typical of his kind.
Dershowitz says we need a special part of the Justice Department, a permanent part, that is apolitical to investigate the President.
That would be a bad idea. Texas had such an organization, albeit it was a task the Travis County DA just assumed rather than being established by any legislation, but it became quazi-official by legislation funding it. The particular job was to investigate any state level elected official for unethical or unlawful behavior.
As many known by now; a former Travis County DA got drunk and then decided to drive her car. She was arrested by her own county's sheriff's deputy. She then threatened those deputies, and all this was captured on video and released to the public. The Governor seeing the unlawful and unethical behavior of the DA said she should resign, and failing to resign; her assumed duties to monitor others for unethical and unlawful behavior should be defunded by veto if necessary. She refused, he vetoed funding, and the Governor was arrested for threatening a government official by carrying out his State Constitutional unconditional authority to veto legislation. Over time, the charges were dismissed in court.
That stupid ordeal seems to be the template that Mueller is using against Trump.
who un-friends someone because of Hillary getting her comeuppance is hardly a liberal
Yes, he is. Consider the logical implications of liberalism. It is in principle divergent, not tolerant, or any other connotation or denotation ascribed to it. Classical liberalism, on the other hand, has its principles recorded, where they are observable and reproducible. It's the same for classical progressivism vs progressivism, which is merely a philosophy of [unqualified] monotonic change). The same for conservatism vs American conservatism, where the principles are recorded in the national charter (Declaration of Independence) and bylaws (Constitution).
re: principles matter
It's the same for concepts such as "forward thinking", which are merely unqualified emotional appeals.
Constitution prohibits attainder by legislature.
Special counsel is the way around it. this will go on till Trump is dead and then onto his family.
"I took the position (back in 2011) that free speech on Facebook matters even though Facebook is a private company."
Does that mean that ,even though this is your private website, you allow all comments no matter how egregious.
Does that mean that ,even though this is your private website, you allow all comments no matter how egregious.
Believe me. She does. Stop by sometime after the sun is over the yardarm.
I love it when two liberal Jews argue about conservative Christian values.
Jeffrey Toobin is the hackiest of hacky hacks; I have never heard him speak a single non-shill word.
Toobin is a partisan hack journalist who resorts to ad hominem attacks on Dershowitz because he can’t counter his arguments.
As I’ve mentioned here before I was interviewed by Toobin years ago on a matter about which I had considerable personal knowledge. His questions were loaded and he was combative because my answers did not support his take on the issues. I was living overseas and had no interest in the outcome and he knew that. Not surprisingly, my input did not appear in his article.
I find it interesting that CNN has sunk to the level at which they present a dunce like Toobin to counter a distinguished legal scholar like Dershowitz. But then who else can they get. The issues are cut and dried and the once admirable Larry Tribe has descended into darkness.
I read two pieces about Meuller this week: the first about the FBI and the Whitey Bulger case in Boston, a Mueller run fiasco, in which 4 men were sent to prison - three on death row,- for a crime they didn’t commit, to cover for an FBI informant. Thankfully the convictions were overturned before they killed them. The second about the thoroughly botched, outrageous anthrax case post 9/11, in which Mueller destroyed two innocent men, one of whom committed suicide. And I wonder, why does this man still have a job, and why did any Republican think he was a good choice to run this investigation?
Joshua Barker said...
...
What crime, specifically, do you allege that Donald Trump is guilty of that justifies a NEVER-ENDING investigation, designed solely to hamstring a sitting President, and what EVIDENCE do you provide to back up your claims? Please be specific..
I don't know.
I am waiting for the Mueller investigation to be completed, and something to be reported out. Perhaps a report on what was not charged, or a charging document that details what is being charged. I don't know.
But I have to do that annoying thing of answering a question with a question. (I have to do it; I have to. I have no choice. No choice.)
How is Trump being "hamstrung" by the Mueller investigation? There is no limit on the president posed by this investigation. No court orders constraining his activities or executive power. How is Trump "hamstrung" in this?
James K said...
Trey Gowdy is not, and never has been, any sort of Democrat-sympathizer.
Maybe not, but he's become the epitome of the GOPe MSM sycophant. His statement criticizing Trump's lawyer ("If you have an innocent client, Mr. Dowd, act like it") was completely ridiculous, is if it's inappropriate for one's lawyer to try to end a bogus investigation.
You don't have to worry about Dowd anymore...
Blogger Chuck said...
Joshua Barker said...
...
"What crime, specifically, do you allege that Donald Trump is guilty of that justifies a NEVER-ENDING investigation, designed solely to hamstring a sitting President, and what EVIDENCE do you provide to back up your claims? Please be specific.."
"I don't know."
But Chuck. You've already hung and quartered him.
You don't have to worry about Dowd anymore...
I was not worried about Dowd, I was and am suspicious of Gowdy. If Dowd was pushed out for saying something completely innocuous, I am even more annoyed with Gowdy for attacking him.
How is Trump being "hamstrung" by the Mueller investigation? There is no limit on the president posed by this investigation. No court orders constraining his activities or executive power. How is Trump "hamstrung" in this?
Is this a serious question? You think having a zealous, likely partisan, investigator with an unlimited budget going over every detail of one's personal and professional life for the past several years has no impact? Certainly everyone who has worked for him has been subject to questioning, subpoenas of documents, and they've all had to deal with a constant barrage of media questions on this, which consumes a lot of time and energy.
Dowd left because he did not want Trump to sit for an interview with Mueller.
Trump wants to. I don't know if his reasons are sufficient.
Dowd also wanted Trump to fire Mueller.
"they've all had to deal with a constant barrage of media questions on this, which consumes a lot of time and energy."
I would think this would severely limit the possibilities for staffing the administration, which of course is the purpose.
Chuck Channeling Schumer wrote: “Basically, Gowdy thinks Mueller is doing a good job, he doesn't think of the investigation as a "WITCH HUNT!", and he does not think it should be shut down.”
Gowdy cannot know other than from the results produced what kind of a job Mueller is doing. He appears to be a pretty good lawyer. No pretty good lawyer can believe Mueller’s indictments fall within the narrow scope of his charge, that his plea bargains are anything other than chickenshit or that probable cause ever existed for the investigation - one of Dershowitz’s points. Consequently, It can be fairly assumed that Gowdy has some ulterior motive for his pronouncements.
Andrew McCarthy is more than pretty good, Chuck. You should give him a read over at NeverTrump National Review on these subjects.
hombre said...
Chuck Channeling Schumer wrote: “Basically, Gowdy thinks Mueller is doing a good job, he doesn't think of the investigation as a "WITCH HUNT!", and he does not think it should be shut down.”
Gowdy cannot know other than from the results produced what kind of a job Mueller is doing. He appears to be a pretty good lawyer. No pretty good lawyer can believe Mueller’s indictments fall within the narrow scope of his charge, that his plea bargains are anything other than chickenshit or that probable cause ever existed for the investigation - one of Dershowitz’s points. Consequently, It can be fairly assumed that Gowdy has some ulterior motive for his pronouncements.
Andrew McCarthy is more than pretty good, Chuck. You should give him a read over at NeverTrump National Review on these subjects.
Oh, I've read Andy. I make a habit of reading Andy. I've been reading Andy for years. Long before his contribution to the "Against Trump" issue. And since; I'm still reading him. Even if I don't always agree with him (disagreement is rare), he is always compelling.
Does Toobin sit in when CNN holds a panel on Trump's alleged extramarital affairs. I'm guessing not. It would be terribly awkward.
I am sorry to have to write this, because as with Unknown above, I think there's a lot about Gowdy to like, but: There's a reason both he and Chaffetz suddenly resigned their seats without any advance notice nor anyone believing they were thinking about it for awhile.
And that reason is: The Deep State got to them, somehow.
”Honest question: Does anyone - outside of knee-jerk liberals - think Jeffery T is a brilliant legal scholar?”
Inga. She was singing Toobin’s praises and trashing Turley awhile back.
But she, of course, qualifies for your knee-jerk liberal exception.
An allegation of a crime is required by the statute under which Mueller was appointed.
Rosenstein ignored the law and appointed Mueller anyway.
Law and order Republicans (and LLR Fopdoodles, too) suddenly don't care about following the law.
Toobin had only one goal when he accepted the interview. Advance the narrative that Derschowitz is a shill for President Trump. That's it. I have only seen Derschowitz interviewed a hand full of times. Read and article or two he authored. I will leave to the legal scholars here, but his stance on any subject is pretty easy to predict. He is a civil libertarian, and comes down on the side of citizens, with extremely tight chains on the machinations of govt power. Toobin is smart enough to make the same predictions, his attempt to smear Derschowitz was a laughable, transparent failure
The guy who needs to fire Mueller is Rosenstein, but he has his own exposures (as does Mueller) re Cassandra and Uranium One, so keeping Mueller on the prowl screens him.
We’re I Trump I would go on National TVin an address to the nation and read an open letter to Muellergiving him 60 or 90 days to put up or shut up. If he still has nothing by then, his appointment is terminated. I think fair minded people would accept that.
Once that Mueller circus is done, I would fire Rosenstein and tell Sessions to start earning his keep
The Revelation that McCabe a) unthinkably, conducted a secret investigation of his superior Sessions and b) exonerated him, should surely release Sessions from his obligation to recuse.
My opinion of Toobin just dropped to zero. Makes it easier going forward: there are some people you can simply tune out and not worry too much that you might be missing something important.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा