Karl Rove is the source

No Limit

No Limit

Party Escort Bot
Joined
Sep 14, 2003
Messages
9,018
Reaction score
1
We had another thread on here and many Republicans claimed I was wild for making accussations when there was no certain evidance, I admit they were partly right. Those Republicans also stated that if Rove was the source they would say that Rove is a traitor and he will not get a defense from them; if this is the case I will respect those members. With that said, Newsweek will report on July 18th that Rove was actually the source for Cooper that said Wilson's wife was a CIA agent working with weapons of mass destruction.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/10/AR2005071001000.html

Rove had a short conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper on July 11, 2003, three days before Robert D. Novak publicly exposed Plame in a column about her husband, Joseph C. Wilson IV.

....

Cooper, according to an internal Time e-mail obtained by Newsweek magazine, spoke with Rove before Novak's column was published. In the conversation, Rove gave Cooper a "big warning" that Wilson's assertions might not be entirely accurate and that it was not the director of the CIA or the vice president who sent Wilson on his trip. Rove apparently told Cooper that it was "Wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip," according to a story in Newsweek's July 18 issue.
Click to expand...

There you go, Rove is the source for this information. He might have a legal defense where the law that says he is a traitor won't apply to him but to me and all that said in that thread they would not stand by him if he did this he is a traitor.

Here is a transcript of the White House getting grilled on Rove's involvement:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/TRANSCRIPT_WHITE_HOUSE_GRILLED_0711.html

QUESTION: Scott, can I ask you this: Did Karl Rove commit a crime?

MCCLELLAN: Again, David, this is a question relating to a ongoing investigation, and you have my response related to the investigation. And I don't think you should read anything into it other than: We're going to continue not to comment on it while it's ongoing.

Advertisement


QUESTION: Do you stand by your statement from the fall of 2003, when you were asked specifically about Karl and Elliot Abrams and Scooter Libby, and you said, "I've gone to each of those gentlemen, and they have told me they are not involved in this"?

QUESTION: Do you stand by that statement?

MCCLELLAN: And if you will recall, I said that, as part of helping the investigators move forward on the investigation, we're not going to get into commenting on it. That was something I stated back near that time as well.

QUESTION: Scott, this is ridiculous. The notion that you're going to stand before us, after having commented with that level of detail, and tell people watching this that somehow you've decided not to talk.

You've got a public record out there. Do you stand by your remarks from that podium or not?

MCCLELLAN: I'm well aware, like you, of what was previously said. And I will be glad to talk about it at the appropriate time. The appropriate time is when the investigation...

QUESTION: (inaudible) when it's appropriate and when it's inappropriate?

MCCLELLAN: If you'll let me finish.

QUESTION: No, you're not finishing. You're not saying anything.

You stood at that podium and said that Karl Rove was not involved. And now we find out that he spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife. So don't you owe the American public a fuller explanation. Was he involved or was he not? Because contrary to what you told the American people, he did indeed talk about his wife, didn't he?

MCCLELLAN: There will be a time to talk about this, but now is not the time to talk about it.

QUESTION: Do you think people will accept that, what you're saying today?

MCCLELLAN: Again, I've responded to the question.

QUESTION: You're in a bad spot here, Scott...

(LAUGHTER)

... because after the investigation began -- after the criminal investigation was under way -- you said, October 10th, 2003, "I spoke with those individuals, Rove, Abrams and Libby. As I pointed out, those individuals assured me they were not involved in this," from that podium. That's after the criminal investigation began.

Now that Rove has essentially been caught red-handed peddling this information, all of a sudden you have respect for the sanctity of the criminal investigation.

MCCLELLAN: No, that's not a correct characterization. And I think you are well aware of that.

We know each other very well. And it was after that period that the investigators had requested that we not get into commenting on an ongoing criminal investigation.

And we want to be helpful so that they can get to the bottom of this. Because no one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States.

I am well aware of what was said previously. I remember well what was said previously. And at some point I look forward to talking about it. But until the investigation is complete, I'm just not going to do that.

QUESTION: So you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore and since then you haven't.

MCCLELLAN: Again, you're continuing to ask questions relating to an ongoing criminal investigation and I'm just not going to respond to them. QUESTION: When did they ask you to stop commenting on it, Scott? Can you pin down a date?

MCCLELLAN: Back in that time period.

QUESTION: Well, then the president commented on it nine months later. So was he not following the White House plan?

MCCLELLAN: I appreciate your questions. You can keep asking them, but you have my response.

QUESTION: Well, we are going to keep asking them.

When did the president learn that Karl Rove had had a conversation with a news reporter about the involvement of Joseph Wilson's wife in the decision to send him to Africa?

MCCLELLAN: I've responded to the questions.

QUESTION: When did the president learn that Karl Rove had been...

MCCLELLAN: I've responded to your questions.

QUESTION: After the investigation is completed, will you then be consistent with your word and the president's word that anybody who was involved will be let go?

MCCLELLAN: Again, after the investigation is complete, I will be glad to talk about it at that point.

QUESTION: Can you walk us through why, given the fact that Rove's lawyer has spoken publicly about this, it is inconsistent with the investigation, that it compromises the investigation to talk about the involvement of Karl Rove, the deputy chief of staff, here?

MCCLELLAN: Well, those overseeing the investigation expressed a preference to us that we not get into commenting on the investigation while it's ongoing. And that was what they requested of the White House. And so I think in order to be helpful to that investigation, we are following their direction.

QUESTION: Scott, there's a difference between commenting on an investigation and taking an action...

MCCLELLAN: (inaudible)

QUESTION: Can I finish, please?

MCCLELLAN: I'll come back to you in a minute.

.....

QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?

MCCLELLAN: Again, these are all questions coming up in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation. And you've heard my response on this.

QUESTION: So you're not going to respond as to whether or not the president has confidence in his deputy chief of staff?

MCCLELLAN: You're asking this question in the context of an ongoing investigation, and I would not read anything into it other then I'm simply going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

QUESTION: Has there been any change, or is there a plan for Mr. Rove's portfolio to be altered in any way?

MCCLELLAN: Again, you have my response to these questions.
Click to expand...

Honestly, how much do they have to pay this guy to sit there and defend the lies of this administration? I don't think I'd do it for all the money in the world.
 
No Limit said:
We had another thread on here and many Republicans claimed I was wild for making accussations when there was no certain evidance, I admit they were partly right. Those Republicans also stated that if Rove was the source they would say that Rove is a traitor and he will not get a defense from them; if this is the case I will respect those members. With that said, Newsweek will report on July 18th that Rove was actually the source for Cooper that said Wilson's wife was a CIA agent working with weapons of mass destruction.

There you go, Rove is the source for this information. He might have a legal defense where the law that says he is a traitor won't apply to him but to me and all that said in that thread they would not stand by him if he did this he is a traitor.

Honestly, how much do they have to pay this guy to sit there and defend the lies of this administration? I don't think I'd do it for all the money in the world.
Click to expand...
so, is this confirmed?
because it seems to me right now they're going off an email, i guess we'll know when that one reporter testifies..
though if it is Rove then he had some balls to tell that one reporter it was alright to release his name
 
no limit the question is whether he did anything illegal. i never said i'd not support him (mostly now i'm just supporting him over you for obvious reasons) if he was the source, if he did anything illegal then yes i will no longer defend him.
 
gh0st said:
no limit the question is whether he did anything illegal. i never said i'd not support him (mostly now i'm just supporting him over you for obvious reasons) if he was the source, if he did anything illegal then yes i will no longer defend him.
Click to expand...
No, no, and no. Look, you are trying to argue how legal what he did was. That can be debated on forever and I will leave that up to the criminal justice system when it gets to the point. What I am saying is what he did was wrong and in my eyes he is a traitor; as he should be in yours. The fact is he was the source for this as this new development states. All I want to know from you is if you support what he did ignoring the legal battle that will take place in the future.
so, is this confirmed?
because it seems to me right now they're going off an email, i guess we'll know when that one reporter testifies..
though if it is Rove then he had some balls to tell that one reporter it was alright to release his name
Click to expand...
Yes, we are going off an email which is an official email Time was forced by the courts to release. That emails states Rove was the source meaning he was the source; no way to spin this. What they will be spinning is how legal it was for him to do what he did.
 
I would also like to point out again that Bush said he would fire anyone in the white house that was involved in that leak; lets see if this is another case of Bush being a liar.
 
What I am saying is what he did was wrong and in my eyes he is a traitor; as he should be in yours.
Click to expand...
Whoa, whoa. Not everyone is forced to agree with the "ALMIGHTY" No limit. Wait to see what the reporter has to say.
 
They should fire Rove just like the Administration had promised back when this thing first began. I hope Rove is pouring beads of sweat right now.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Whoa, whoa. Not everyone is forced to agree with the "ALMIGHTY" No limit. Wait to see what the reporter has to say.
Click to expand...
What? Are you disputing that Rove is the actual source?
 
no one in right mind would ever dispute anything from the All Mighty


...hey I have a question for the almighty one .....if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around does it REALLY make a sound? really? really?


why do bad things happen to good people?
 
It's extremely quiet in here. Where are all those Republicans that said they would not support Rove if he did this? Maybe I just need to kick this thread so they see it.

It turns out that the white house is passing out talking points to right wing pundits.
CNN News-Reporters have discovered Talking Points on Rove matter issued by the White House. Essentially the Talking Points issued by the White House to republican operatives and cooperative media personalities are the same that Rove's attorney Luskin has been issuing claiming there is no criminal activity, attacking Plame and Wilson, and stating Rove did not knowingly expose a CIA operative, and did not use her name.

In a press conference shown about 1 PM McClellan refused to answer questions about the Talking Points asked of him by Helen Thomas and
other reporters.
Click to expand...

So instead of doing the right thing and firing Rove as they claimed they would they are putting the propaganda machine in to full gear. But let me guess, this is perfectly fine, right?
 
If Rove is the source, and Cooper has been given permission to testify by Rove, why is Judith Miller still in jail if Rove is her source? I mean, this is the New York Times we are talking about, not National Review online.
 
Olympus said:
If Rove is the source, and Cooper has been given permission to testify by Rove, why is Judith Miller still in jail if Rove is her source? I mean, this is the New York Times we are talking about, not National Review online.
Click to expand...
That's a good question. Personally I believe that Rove never gave Cooper permission directly; he made that up to avoid jail time but now it worked in Rove's benefit since he knew the emails would be released anyway.

Judith Miller I think just wants the publicity. I mean come on, did you see the pictures of her laughing as she was being taken to jail?
 
They should put him on trial already for christ sake.
 
The White House handing out talking points huh? I see puppet strings attached to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and O'Reilly. We've really got a corrupt government in place right now.
 
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/13/85526.shtml

while it may be a more conservative news site, this is still information to take into account, since it says the special prosecutor for the investigation has said Rove is not a target in the investigation.... the plot thickens

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/12/223422.shtml

and more, this time by actually looking at what Novak wrote following it, saying his source wasn;t a "partisan gunslinger" and i'd say Karl Rove is undeniably partisan, hmmmmmmm....

hmmm... no one;s rushing in to dispute this, maybe it's undeniable
 
Olympus said:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006955

Be sure and take a look at that op-ed, too. Shares my POV exactly.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight, the whole basis for that article is that Rove did a service because Plame and Wilson were some kind of liars? No, Plame was not the one that approved Wilson's trip to Niger, something the article claims. Meaning that article is nothing but a bunch of lies. read this, it not only talks about how Plame was a national hero that risked her life for this country but exposes the lies:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.
....
The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken". I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached. For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC. They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.
Click to expand...
 
Icarusintel said:
wow, something that actuallty looks at the whole story, thank you, it was a good read
Click to expand...
Thats not a story, its a bunch of slander on a national hero. Read the link I posted about Plame.

They are discreding Wilson because Wilson was right; but that has nothing to do with the leak. The fact is Rove exposed a national hero for his own personal political gains and risked many lives in doing so. Now, when I said people would come to his defense before there was real evidance he did this I was insulted and called an idiot for saying people would defend someone outing a national hero; I expect a full apology from those people.
 
So which scumbag should we believe, Rove or Wilson? Remember, Rove is backed up by the British government and bipartisain commission reports and the Kerry campaign wouldn't even help out Wilson. Guess where my money is.
 
Olympus said:
So which scumbag should we believe, Rove or Wilson? Remember, Rove is backed up by the British government and bipartisain commission reports and the Kerry campaign wouldn't even help out Wilson. Guess where my money is.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with Wilson. This is about Rove leaking the name of an active undercover agent that had many people working for her around the globe that could be executed if they were exposed. And you are defending this.

Republicans are all for supporting the troops and people that risk their lives for their country as long as those people don't speak out against their dear leader. As soon as that happens those heros are liars and they will stop at nothing to expose them even if it means putting many of these heros lives in danger.

Let me point you to this post from Ghost:

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1488817&postcount=35

Guess what, you guys are rooting for Rove.
 
Damn, it got silent in here really quick. Here is a good letter from Howard Dean (yes, it was posted at DemocraticUnderground.com):
Politics drove someone in the White House to do a treacherous, potentially criminal thing: a senior administration official leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative. They endangered the agent's life and compromised our national security in a time of war.

Here's what former president George H.W. Bush said about that kind of crime: "Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors." That's from a speech on April 26, 1999.

I agree. But as it became clear this week that Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove is a subject of the criminal investigation into the leak, the second Bush administration has gone silent. And its operatives have launched a cover-up and smear campaign against anyone raising questions.

This is bigger than politics -- every American should agree that this administration needs to come clean immediately about this leak, and any White House official's role in it. The only way to pressure this administration is to show that Americans will not tolerate this -- and that every American regardless of party will unite and publicly demand that they come clean:

http://www.democrats.org/comeclean

We will publish comments from Republicans, Democrats and independents across the country -- demonstrating that our party won't play politics with this, but keeping the pressure on this administration to do the right thing. And we will do it until they come clean.

When former President Bush made the remarks above, he wasn't speaking as a Republican. He wasn't even speaking as a former president -- he was speaking as a former CIA director who understands the sacrifice of our covert operatives and the danger of their work.

What happened here is even worse than what former President Bush describes. That's because the leak was not an accident -- it was part of a campaign to try to discredit anyone, including those inside the CIA, who questioned the administration's claims about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Other former CIA officials agree. Three former operatives (who are also registered Republicans) gave this joint statement in testimony on October 24, 2003: "This has set a sickening precedent. The 'senior Administration officials' who did this have warned all U.S. intelligence officers and the Intelligence Community that any one individual may be compromised if providing information or factual analysis the White House does not like."

This is a serious situation -- it goes to the heart of our national security, and what kind of standards we have for those entrusted with secret and potentially dangerous information. Forward this message to everyone you know -- Republican, Democrat, independent -- and ask them to add their name to the list of Americans demanding this administration come clean:

http://www.democrats.org/comeclean

You don't have to be a former intelligence official to understand the implications of this crime.

Here's what former Republican Party chairman Ed Gillespie had to say on 'Hardball' on September 30, 2003: "I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA operative -- it's abhorrent, and it should be a crime, and it is a crime." Asked by MSNBC's Chris Matthews if it would be worse than Watergate, he said, "Yeah, I suppose in terms of the real world implications of it. It's not just politics."

George W. Bush said when this leak became public that he "welcomed the investigation" and called the leak a "criminal action." He pledged that anyone found to be the source would be "taken care of".

But the New York Times reported that when asked yesterday if he would fire Karl Rove, the question was met with a "stony silence".

Will George W. Bush keep his word and demand that everyone in his administration uphold the trust of their office? This is his chance to rise above politics and do the right thing for our security and for our country.

Our party will rise above politics by asking all Americans, regardless of party, to publicly ask the administration to come clean about this serious situation:

http://www.democrats.org/comeclean

Please get this message out to as many people as possible. Americans of all political persuasions should agree that we need to get the truth -- and take responsibility for publicly demanding it.

Thank you.

Governor Howard Dean, M.D.
Chairman, Democratic National Committee
Click to expand...
 
Rove is guilty and the White House knows it. Thats why they refuse to comment on it. Bush won't even elaborate on the subject. Well, its kinda hard to get Bush to elaborate on anything really.

:cheers:
 
Leak of Agent's Name Causes Exposure of CIA Front Firm

By Walter Pincus and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, October 4, 2003; Page A03

The leak of a CIA operative's name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure, Bush administration officials said yesterday.

-snip-
After the name of the company was broadcast yesterday, administration officials confirmed that it was a CIA front. They said the obscure and possibly defunct firm was listed as Plame's employer on her W-2 tax forms in 1999 when she was working undercover for the CIA. Plame's name was first published July 14 in a newspaper column by Robert D. Novak that quoted two senior administration officials. They were critical of her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, for his handling of a CIA mission that undercut President Bush's claim that Iraq had sought uranium from the African nation of Niger for possible use in developing nuclear weapons.

-snip-
A former diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity said yesterday that every foreign intelligence service would run Plame's name through its databases within hours of its publication to determine if she had visited their country and to reconstruct her activities.

"That's why the agency is so sensitive about just publishing her name," the former diplomat said.

FEC rules require donors to list their employment. Plame used her married name, Valerie E. Wilson, and listed her employment as an "analyst" with Brewster-Jennings & Associates. The document establishes that Plame has worked undercover within the past five years. The time frame is one of the standards used in making determinations about whether a disclosure is a criminal violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A40012-2003Oct3?language=printer

It makes me sick that top republican leaders are defending this action.
 
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/15/cia.leak.rove.ap/index.html
well, well, well, looks like Rove may not be the source after all and his comments may have been taken out of context, and this is even from CNN and not some right-wing news site, seems someone else in the news community, perhaps Novak, told Rove about Plame's identity as a CIA agent.... now if this all turns out to be true, guess this thread's name would be false
 
Looks like some your your facts need to be revised, No Limit:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050715-121257-9887r.htm

A former CIA covert agent who supervised Mrs. Plame early in her career yesterday took issue with her identification as an "undercover agent," saying that she worked for more than five years at the agency's headquarters in Langley and that most of her neighbors and friends knew that she was a CIA employee.
"She made no bones about the fact that she was an agency employee and her husband was a diplomat," Fred Rustmann, a covert agent from 1966 to 1990, told The Washington Times.

"Her neighbors knew this, her friends knew this, his friends knew this. A lot of blame could be put on to central cover staff and the agency because they weren't minding the store here. ... The agency never changed her cover status."

Mr. Rustmann, who spent 20 of his 24 years in the agency under "nonofficial cover" -- also known as a NOC, the same status as the wife of Mr. Wilson -- also said that she worked under extremely light cover.
In addition, Mrs. Plame hadn't been out as an NOC since 1997, when she returned from her last assignment, married Mr. Wilson and had twins, USA Today reported yesterday.
The distinction matters because a law that forbids disclosing the name of undercover CIA operatives applies to agents that had been on overseas assignment "within the last five years."
"She was home for such a long time, she went to work every day at Langley, she was in an analytical type job, she was married to a high-profile diplomat with two kids," Mr. Rustmann said. "Most people who knew Valerie and her husband, I think, would have thought that she was an overt CIA employee."
Click to expand...


http://www.nynewsday.com/news/natio...469,print.story?coll=nyc-nationhome-headlines

Chief presidential adviser Karl Rove testified to a grand jury that he talked with two journalists before they divulged the identity of an undercover CIA officer but that he originally learned about the operative from the news media and not government sources, according to a person briefed on the testimony.
Click to expand...

But at the same time, Wilson acknowledged his wife was no longer in an undercover job at the time Novak's column first identified her. "My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity," he said.
Click to expand...
 
Ah, now I know why No Limit didnt want to wait, a different side of the story came out! Interesting....
 
seinfeldrules said:
Ah, now I know why No Limit didnt want to wait, a different side of the story came out! Interesting....
Click to expand...

Wasn't that what you were saying all along? To wait?
 
I'am completely blank on this topic -- the London Bombings happened and BAM! No more CNN or Intranet news for me. :p
 
the truth shall set you free!
even more info about the whole thing, this whole "Rove is the source" thing is really starting to crumble here
 
Icarusintel said:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/15/cia.leak.rove.ap/index.html
well, well, well, looks like Rove may not be the source after all and his comments may have been taken out of context, and this is even from CNN and not some right-wing news site, seems someone else in the news community, perhaps Novak, told Rove about Plame's identity as a CIA agent.... now if this all turns out to be true, guess this thread's name would be false
Click to expand...
Sorry guys, its been a while. My company got broken in to and they took everything, my work is on the verge of going bankrupt because of this so I really haven't had time to check this board. I will try to check in here once in a while but I won't be around as much as I used to for the next couple weeks or maybe even months.

The article cites a anonymous source, I would prefer to follow this:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4765052

The memo was circulated among top government officials on Air Force One when they were headed to Africa. Not only did Rove see this memo Plame's identity was marked as (S) which means secret. Rove knew who Plame was long before Novak knew it.

President Bush boards Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington en route to Dakar, Senegal. It is the start of a weeklong tour of the continent that become overshadowed by questions about alleged Iraqi WMD.

Also on board is a top-secret briefing book containing a memo prepared by the State Department identifying Valerie Wilson (Plame's married name) as a CIA officer and as the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
Click to expand...

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4764919

I have some information I will try to post today, its not new but with me being gone I will try to update everyone here on any new developments in the last few weeks.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Ah, now I know why No Limit didnt want to wait, a different side of the story came out! Interesting....
Click to expand...
Do you deny that Bush lied when he said he would fire anyone involved in the leak? Or was he just given bad intelligence at the time that said Rove didn't do it so he figured he was safe?
 
CptStern said:
hey No Limit havent seen you in awhile :)
Click to expand...
I was having HL2.net withdrawals. The last 2 weeks have been hell for me but things are starting to get back to normal; I hope you didn't think I'd leave you all alone here with all those crazy right wingers.
 
No Limit said:
I was having HL2.net withdrawals. The last 2 weeks have been hell for me but things are starting to get back to normal; I hope you didn't think I'd leave you all alone here with all those crazy right wingers.
Click to expand...


well ...yes I was starting to think that <shudder> /me breathes sigh of relief


btw here's a nice little topic for ya ...enjoy :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
The Gigantic Vidya Music Dump
Replies
27
Views
5K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Chris D
Forum update
Replies
8
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
  • Poll
A proposition: ValveTime Half-Life 1 co-op event
Replies
5
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top