Fact-Checking Central (2026)

25/10/2022

🤥Social media users claim House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "staged" the January 6, 2021 attack at the US Capitol by rejecting security assistance and hiring a camera crew working with her daughter, a documentary filmmaker, to record her response as the violence played out. This is false; the attack unfolded on live television and has resulted in hundreds of criminal charges, nor did Pelosi hire a camera crew or block the deployment of extra National Guard troops to the building.🤥

"Pelosi hiring her daughter to bring a film crew to video Jan6 proves that this day was staged and planned by the left to frame Trump and his followers," says an October 14, 2022 post on Gettr, a social media platform catering to conservatives, that was shared on Instagram.

Similar posts faulting Pelosi for the riot were shared across social media -- including by conservative activist Jack Posobiec and Donald Trump Jr, former president Donald Trump's eldest son, who claimed Pelosi denied a request from Trump for extra National Guard support.

"So Nancy Pelosi refuses Trump's request for a national guard presence on Jan 6 & simultaneously has a documentary film crew in her office where are you can hear her poorly delivered tough guy act," the younger Trump wrote. "I'm sure I'll be called conspiracy theorist for thinking this isn't a coincidence!"

In another post, he added: "Conspiracy theorists are just people capable of pattern recognition."

The allegations followed the ninth hearing from the House committee investigating the January 6 attack, during which the committee aired new footage of Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer phoning various government officials for help protecting the Capitol.

The video was captured by Alexandra Pelosi, the speaker's daughter and a documentary filmmaker who has for years produced documentaries for HBO.

But Pelosi did not stage the attack, which saw a mob of Trump supporters push past barriers, fight police, smash windows and breach the building as they tried to stop the certification of the 2020 presidential election results showing Joe Biden as the winner.

The event was witnessed by the world on live television, as well as the lawmakers who were forced to leave their chambers during the tumult. Approximately 140 police officers were assaulted while protecting the Capitol. Some of those officers have testified in public hearings about the attack.

As of October 6, more than 880 people have been arrested in relation to January 6, according to the US Justice Department. More than 400 have pleaded guilty.

*Filming for a documentary*

Drew Hammill, Nancy Pelosi's deputy chief of staff, told AFP the claims that the speaker paid for a camera crew are "silly" and "made up."

"The Speaker did not hire her daughter," Hammill said in an email. "Alexandra was shooting video on her own on a handheld camera. There was no crew."

CNN obtained additional footage from Alexandra Pelosi and HBO, its sister network. As CNN anchor Anderson Cooper aired the video on his show hours after the October 13 hearing from the House committee, he said it was "part of a documentary that Alexandra Pelosi has been working on for years."

"She was with her mom and her family documenting what was supposed to be a peaceful transfer of political power on January 6, the kind of day that distinguishes this country from so many others, when things came unglued," Cooper said.

Contacted by AFP, Alexandra Pelosi did not answer questions, saying she could not take seriously any claim about staging the attack.

Other social media posts suggested Nancy Pelosi faked the phone calls captured in her daughter's footage because the screen on her handset appeared turned off at one point. Hammill said he believes Pelosi was using an iPhone in the moment -- the full video of which shows her placing the call before the screen goes dark. Such devices typically have a "proximity sensor," a feature built in to save battery and prevent callers from accidentally hitting buttons while talking.

♦️Pelosi did not reject National Guard♦️

Regarding her personal conduct, Pelosi did not reject an order from Trump to authorize additional members of the National Guard to protect the Capitol, as Trump's allies have insisted for months. She would have been unable to do so; the DC National Guard "reports only to the President," according to its website.

"The only governmental officials who have authority to activate National Guard service members are the president of the United States, the secretary of defense, a state governor, and an adjutant general of a state," said Dwight Stirling, the founder and CEO of the Center for Law and Military Policy, a think tank.

"If the president calls the National Guard to the US Capitol, no congressional official has the unilateral authority to decline its service.," added Jane L. Campbell, president and CEO of the non-profit US Capitol Historical Society. "Even so, there is no evidence whatsoever that Speaker Pelosi attempted to.”

Paul Irving, the House Sergeant at Arms at the time of the attack, testified in 2021 that he did not confer with congressional leadership about requesting further National Guard support until January 6. The recently released footage from Alexandra Pelosi shows Nancy Pelosi and Schumer speaking with congressional staff and US and state officials -- including then-Virginia governor Ralph Northam -- about sending National Guard reinforcements to the Capitol.

"We need a full National Guard component, now," Schumer is seen saying in a phone call with former Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy.

Hammill said: "The speaker was not made aware of any request for the National Guard until January 6th as the Capitol was being breached."

The false claim about Pelosi blocking National Guard assistance appears to trace back to remarks that former Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller recalled Trump making, disclosed when Miller spoke to a Vanity Fair reporter in the waning days of the Trump administration. Miller said Trump floated the idea before January 6 of needing 10,000 National Guard troops at the Capitol, but Miller told the reporter he regarded it as a case of the then-president being "hyperbolic." Miller also told lawmakers in May 2021 about Trump making such a comment, saying it came with "no elaboration" during a phone call lasting fewer than 30 seconds.

But in a recording of its interview with Miller that the House committee probing the attack posted to Twitter in July 2022, Miller said that as far as direct orders went, "there was no order from the president" before January 6 to direct 10,000 National Guard troops to the Capitol.

Both Miller and McCarthy said on other occasions that while the Department of Defense approved Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser’s request for 340 unarmed members of the DC National Guard for traffic and crowd control, no other National Guard requests were made.

AFP has fact-checked other misinformation about the January 6 attack.

By Bill McCarthy

Social media users claim House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "staged" the January 6, 2021 attack at the US Capitol by rejecting security assistance and hiring a camera crew working with her daughter, a documentary filmmaker, to record her response as the violence played out. This is false; the attack unfolde...

21/10/2022

A three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit rejected Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) bid to block a subpoena to testify in Fulton County DA Fani Willis’ investigation into efforts to interfere with the 2020 election.

After Sen. Graham had argued that questioning him about post-election calls with Georgia officials would have been “unconstitutional,” Willis urged the 11th Circuit not to render Graham a “super-citizen” by letting him hide behind the Speech or Debate Clause.

Georgia investigators have said they seek to question Graham about phone calls he had with Georgia election officials in late 2020, around the same time that former President Donald Trump’s infamous “find 11,780 votes” call with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) took place. Graham reportedly made at least two calls to Raffensperger and members of his staff in the weeks immediately after the election.

The panel, composed of two Trump appointees (U.S. Circuit Judges Kevin Newsom and Britt Grant) and one Bill Clinton appointee (and U.S. Circuit Judge Charles Wilson) already tipped its hand as to Graham’s absolute immunity argument. On Thursday, the judges were in agreement that Graham had “failed to demonstrate” that the lower court’s “partial quashal” approach would “violate his rights.”

“Should there be a dispute over whether a given question about Senator Graham’s phone calls asks about investigatory conduct, the Senator may raise those issues at that time,” the 11th Circuit said. “We also agree that the three enumerated categories set out by the district court could not qualify as legislative activities under any understanding of Supreme Court precedent. We thus find it unlikely that questions about them would violate the Speech and Debate Clause.”

The court recounted the lower court’s ruling in favor of Graham testifying as follows:

"The district court adopted the more protective view, that the Speech and Debate Clause can shield informal legislative investigations. It included within that category any factfinding inquiries in Senator Graham’s phone calls to Georgia election officials relating to his decision “to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election.” The court quashed the subpoena to the extent that it covered that sort of investigation. But it held that targeted questions about non-investigatory conduct by Senator Graham could proceed. It reasoned that any non-investigatory conduct covered by the subpoena was not protected by the Clause, and that there was genuine dispute about whether Senator Graham’s phone calls with Georgia election officials were investigatory. The court also reasoned that three topics unrelated to the phone calls—communications and coordination with the Trump campaign regarding its post-election efforts in Georgia, public statements regarding the 2020 election, and efforts to “cajole” or “exhort” Georgia election officials—were not legislative activities. And the court noted that Senator Graham may still seek to assert his Speech and Debate Clause privilege if there is a dispute about whether a concrete question implicates his factfinding relating to certification."

In finding against Graham, the 11th Circuit lifted a stay of the district court’s order, which means the case will go to the Superior Court of Fulton County “for further proceedings.”

By Matt Naham

Sen. Graham had argued that questioning him about post-election calls with Georgia officials would be "unconstitutional."

20/10/2022

A California federal judge on Wednesday said then-U.S. President Donald Trump had signed a sworn statement asserting that voter fraud numbers included in a 2020 election lawsuit were accurate, despite being told the numbers were not correct.

U.S. District Judge David Carter made the disclosure in ordering lawyer John Eastman to provide more emails to the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump's supporters.

Eastman was one of Trump's attorneys when the former president and his allies challenged his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden.

Representatives for Trump and Eastman did not immediately return requests for comment.

Carter said Wednesday that Trump had "signed a verification swearing under oath" that the inaccurate fraud numbers were "true and correct" or "believed to be true and correct" to the best of his knowledge and belief, when alleging the improper counting of votes in a county in Georgia.

"The emails show that President Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers, both in court and to the public," the judge wrote.

Carter has previously ruled that Eastman and Trump had likely committed a felony by trying to pressure his then-vice president to obstruct Congress.

The ruling was made in a lawsuit filed by Eastman to block disclosure of the emails to the Jan. 6 select committee, following a congressional subpoena.

Carter has previously ordered Eastman to provide over 200 emails to the committee, after the lawyer resisted the subpoena and claimed that the communications were privileged.

The judge said Wednesday that the vast majority of emails still being sought by congressional investigators should not be handed over, as legal protections given to attorneys and their clients apply to the records.

He said eight emails that would normally be shielded under those protections must be given to the committee, after he found that the communications were in furtherance of a crime -- one of the few times those legal safeguards can be lifted.

Carter found that four emails show that Eastman and other lawyers suggested that the "primary goal" of filing lawsuits was to delay Congress's certification of the 2020 election results.

The judge said four other emails "demonstrate an effort by President Trump and his attorneys to press false claims in federal court for the purpose of delaying the January 6 vote."

Trump and his allies filed over 60 lawsuits challenging the 2020 election, which Biden won, with some complaints alleging voter fraud without evidence to support those claims. Those cases were overwhelmingly rejected by judges, some of which Trump appointed to the federal courts.

The Jan. 6 select committee last week voted to subpoena Trump in its investigation. It is set to issue a report in the coming weeks on its findings.

By Jacqueline Thomsen

A California federal judge on Wednesday said then-U.S. President Donald Trump had signed a sworn statement asserting that voter fraud numbers included in a 2020 election lawsuit were accurate, despite being told the numbers were not correct.

19/10/2022

A Russian researcher who contributed explosive details to a document dubbed the "Steele dossier" that alleged ties between former U.S. President Donald Trump's 2016 election campaign and Russia was acquitted by a jury on Tuesday on charges that he lied to the FBI about the sources of his information.

Igor Danchenko's acquittal in federal court in Washington dealt another blow to Special Counsel John Durham, who was appointed in 2019 by Trump-era Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" probe into whether members of Trump's campaign had colluded with Russia.

Jurors acquitted Danchenko on four charges. The judge in the case earlier had thrown out a fifth charge.

"While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury's decision and thank them for their service," Durham said in a statement.

In another trial of a defendant charged by Durham, a jury in Washington in May acquitted Michael Sussmann, an attorney for Democrat Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, of charges that he lied to the FBI when he passed along a later-discredited tip about possible communications between Trump's business and a Russian bank.

Danchenko, a Russian-born researcher who resides in Northern Virginia, was indicted by Durham's office in 2021 on five counts of making false statements to FBI agents in 2017 about the sources of information he provided to former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.

His attorneys argued that the indictment was baseless, saying their client's answers to the FBI's often "ambiguous" questions were "literally" true and not material.

For instance, Danchenko was accused of misleading the FBI by claiming he never "talked" to Charles Dolan, a Democratic operative and public relations executive, about anything in the Steele dossier, when in fact they had communicated in writing.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Trenga said last week he agreed with the defense, and he dismissed one of the five charges against Danchenko related to his communications with Dolan.

The judge allowed the other four charges to be decided by the jury. Those charges accused Danchenko of lying to the FBI by claiming he had spoken to Sergei Millian, the former president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce, to gather information later used in the dossier.

Danchenko's lawyers maintained their client received an anonymous call from a person who Danchenko suspected was Millian, but he told agents he was not certain it was him.

Steele was hired by a U.S.-based research firm called Fusion GPS, which in turn was retained by Sussmann's law firm on behalf of Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee to dig up dirt on Trump. The dossier contained salacious details about Trump, many of which have never been substantiated.

Trenga placed strict limits on what Durham's team could present as evidence to the jury, including ruling that the scandalous allegations about "Donald Trump's alleged sexual activity" in a Moscow hotel were off limits, finding they were not direct evidence and their relevancy was questionable.

An investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general later found that the FBI improperly continued to rely on unsubstantiated allegations in the Steele dossier when it applied for court-approved warrant applications to monitor the communications of Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser.

A former FBI attorney, Kevin Clinesmith, was later prosecuted by Durham and pleaded guilty to falsifying a document used in the law enforcement agency's warrant applications.

Another special counsel, Robert Mueller, conducted an investigation that documented contacts between Trump's campaign and Russians, but his final report concluded there was not enough evidence to establish that the campaign had engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Moscow.

By Sarah Lynch

The acquittal dealt a blow to Special Counsel John Durham, who was appointed by Trump-era Attorney General Barr.

23/09/2022

🤥Mark Finchem, the Republican running for Arizona Secretary of State, claims former Vice President Mike Pence "seized power" from President Donald Trump on Jan. 6, 2021, and that Pence’s actions amounted to a "coup."🤥

Finchem claimed that testimony by U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., supported his point. He said that during a House select committee hearing investigating the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, Cheney said it was Pence, and not Trump, who contacted the defense secretary and other federal officials.

"Mike Pence seized power over an existing president. He was not president. Donald Trump was still president at that moment," Finchem said in a speech to United Patriots Arizona, a group that says it supports more freedom and less government.

Finchem spoke to the group in July, but his comments resurfaced in news reports in September.

Finchem continued: "Liz Cheney just outed him and I think in doing so reveals that she was complicit. Pence had no authority to order the DOD, (Department of Homeland Security) or (Department of Justice) around. Zero, zip, nada. How long has he been ordering those folks around? Well apparently from Jan 6 to Jan. 20. Ladies and gentlemen, that's a coup. He had no authority to do so."

When the mob of Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol, Pence communicated with military leaders to secure the Capitol and protect Congress members who were there to certify the electoral votes. But as vice president of the United States, president of the U.S. Senate and a member of the National Security Council, Pence’s actions were within his power and purview.

It doesn’t amount to a coup by the former vice president, according to experts on national security.

Finchem is running against Democrat Adrian Fontes, a former Maricopa County elections official. Finchem is part of a national coalition of secretary of state candidates who deny that Joe Biden won the presidency in 2020.

We contacted Finchem’s campaign and received no response.

➡️Pence’s actions Jan. 6

Here is how Pence’s actions unfolded on Jan. 6:

Pence arrived at the Capitol around 12:26 p.m. for the counting of the electoral votes. Shortly before 2 p.m. law enforcement declared that a riot was underway. Some pro-Trump rioters chanted, "Hang Mike Pence."

Shortly before 2:30 p.m. the Secret Service took Pence from the House chamber to his office. Pence refused to leave the Capitol and was moved to the basement.

What we know about Pence’s actions that afternoon comes from testimony during a House oversight committee hearing in 2021 and Jan. 6 House select committee hearings in 2022:

• Cheney said: "You will hear that Donald Trump never picked up the phone that day to order his administration to help. This is not ambiguous. He did not call the military. His secretary of defense received no order. He did not call his attorney general. He did not talk to the Department of Homeland Security. Mike Pence did all of those things; Donald Trump did not."

• U.S. Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff: "There were two or three calls with Vice President Pence. He was very animated and he issued very explicit, very direct, unambiguous orders. There was no question about that. …To Secretary Miller, ‘Get the military down here, get the (National) Guard down here, put down this situation,’ etc."

• Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller said: "The vice president is not in the chain of command. He did not direct me to clear the Capitol. I discussed very briefly with him the situation. He provided insights based on his presence there." Miller said he notified Pence of planned military and law enforcement mobilizations.

• Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen testified that he spoke with Pence to update him on what the department was doing to assist. Rosen spoke again with Pence and other officials in the evening to address when Congress could reassemble.

➡️Pence’s contacts with federal officials did not amount to a coup

A coup is shorthand for "coup d’état," a French phrase meaning "an overthrow of government." A coup is carried out beyond the bounds of legality, and although violence is part of many coups, is it not an essential element.

Experts on national security said Pence’s actions on Jan. 6 did not amount to a coup. A vice president is not in the military chain of command and therefore can’t issue a formal order to the military unless the president has been incapacitated, said Peter Feaver, a Duke University political scientist who worked as a White House security adviser during President George W. Bush’s administration.

"It is appropriate for the vice president, as a member of the National Security Council, to consult with the team about an unfolding crisis and make recommendations for how the various principals should use their delegated powers," Feaver said.

Unless Trump ordered military leaders not to use their delegated powers to rescue Congress from the rioters, he continued, "then there does not appear to be anyone grossly overstepping their authority here."

Pence did not seize the presidency or its powers, said Dakota S. Rudesill, an expert on national security law and policy at Ohio State University

"Trump may have been inactive as president for most of Jan. 6, but he was still the lawful president," said Rudesill, who served in the national intelligence director’s office during the Obama administration. "I think it was certainly within the rights of the vice president or anybody else with a senior position to say, ‘In my opinion, we need to urgently do x and y.’"

Pence’s actions that day fulfilled his oath to defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, said Patrick Eddington, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute.

➡️Our ruling

Finchem said Pence "seized power" from Trump and undertook "a coup" when he called on federal agencies for assistance on Jan. 6.

Pence spoke with military or security leaders on Jan. 6 to get help securing the Capitol.

As vice president of the United States, president of the U.S. Senate and a member of the National Security Council, it was within the scope of Pence’s power to talk to leaders who could defend the Capitol against domestic enemies. That does not equate to Pence seizing power from Trump or orchestrating an overthrow of the government.

By Amy Sherman

🤥🤥We rate this statement Pants on Fire!🤥🤥

Mark Finchem, the Republican running for Arizona Secretary of State, claims former Vice President Mike Pence "seized pow

09/09/2022

A Nevada Republican has wrongly suggested that the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles is swelling the voter rolls with immigrants who are in the country illegally.

The claim was floated on Aug. 9 during a podcast by Steve Bannon, a one-time adviser to former President Donald Trump. Bannon said "mass illegal immigration" has created a "problem with voting." He invited Jim Marchant, the Republican candidate for Nevada secretary of state, to discuss the "illegal alien invasion."

Marchant then suggested that the Nevada secretary of state and officials at the Department of Motor Vehicles allow people who are in the country illegally to join the voter rolls.

"The illegal aliens that are coming in are a huge issue when it comes to voting," Marchant said during the podcast. "Here in Nevada, the DMV registers everybody, and so that means illegals. They don’t check. They are relying on the secretary of state to do the checking and either kick them off the voter rolls or not, which they are not doing."

But that’s not true. The Nevada DMV takes several steps to prevent noncitizens from registering to vote.

Marchant, a former Nevada state assemblyman, said during the podcast that if he’s elected, he will ensure only U.S. citizens register to vote. But he didn’t explain how he would accomplish that and whether his steps would differ from the ones government officials already take.

Marchant will face Democrat Cisco Aguilar, a lawyer and former Nevada Athletic Commission appointee, in a November race to replace current Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske, a Republican, who is term-limited.

Marchant leads a national coalition of candidates running on the falsehood that the 2020 presidential election was stolen by President Joe Biden. Marchant wants to eliminate voting by mail except for limited exceptions, such as military personnel.

Michael Kagan, director of an immigration law clinic at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said there is no evidence of widespread voting by noncitizens.

"Although isolated and random violations happen with voting, including with citizens, I am not aware of any evidence that undocumented immigrants are registering to vote or trying to vote systematically or in any numbers," Kagan said.

*DMV takes steps to only allow citizens to submit voter registration*

In 2018, Nevada voters approved a ballot initiative establishing a system to automatically register "eligible persons" to vote when they apply for or renew driver’s licenses at the DMV. "Eligible persons" must be U.S. citizens. Individuals also can decline to register.

Nevada launched automatic voter registration in 2020, a system used by about two dozen states.

Nevada DMV spokesperson James DeHaven said that prospective voters must first complete an application that requires them to disclose their citizenship status. Applicants sign the form, which says that any misstatement of facts is criminal, potentially a felony.

Customers are not processed for voter registration if:

• They say they are not U.S. citizens;

• They say they were born outside the U.S.;

• They present immigration documents as proof of identity;

• They are applying for a driver authorization card, which is for noncitizens.

DMV staff members are required to explain the voter registration process in detail to each customer.

The DMV does not register people to vote; it passes their registration information to election officials. And the DMV is not the only place people can fill out a voter registration form — they can also apply at county offices, through the mail or online.

🤥Marchant’s claim echoes statements by Trump allies after 2020 election🤥

Marchant did not respond to emails seeking evidence for his claim. But his statement echoes those Trump and his allies made in 2020, after the former president lost Nevada by about 34,000 votes. Trump tweeted in December 2020 that "thousands of noncitizens" had voted in Nevada.

That same month, a few former Republican officials sued Secretary of State Cegavske, alleging that she had failed to keep noncitizens off the voter rolls. The case was filed by former Attorney General Adam Laxalt, who is now running for U.S. Senate; it was withdrawn a few months later.

The lawsuit pointed to anecdotal evidence about a few noncitizens who either voted or were allegedly on the voter rolls over the past decade.

Laxalt’s dropped lawsuit said an analysis showed "many noncitizens may have voted in the recently concluded 2020 election." That was a reference to an allegation in a separate lawsuit filed on behalf of electors for Trump.

In the lawsuit filed on behalf of Trump electors, Republicans compared the DMV files with voter registration records and said they found about 4,000 matches correlating with noncitizens who voted illegally. That lawsuit included multiple allegations of voter fraud, but the courts said the allegations were not credible and dismissed the case.

The state DMV told the Nevada Independent that the residents could have become citizens and not updated their driver’s license records.

Cegavske investigated the allegation about 4,000 noncitizens voting in the 2020 election and released her findings in April 2021. She, too, found people on the voter rolls who registered with immigration paperwork; however, she said that thousands of immigrants become citizens each year.

Cegavske concluded that without specific evidence to identify people who were foreign nationals when they voted, there was nothing further to investigate.

PolitiFact has found anecdotal evidence of noncitizens on the voter rolls in multiple states, but the incidents are rare and would not tilt a statewide election’s outcome. Noncitizens who vote face high risks: They may be deported or incarcerated, or they may undermine their efforts to apply for naturalization.

➡️Our ruling

Marchant said, "Here in Nevada, the DMV registers everybody (to vote) and so that means illegals. They don’t check."

His comments imply that state officials routinely allow immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally to register to vote. He provided no evidence for his claim.

The DMV takes steps to allow only eligible citizens to fill out voter registration paperwork, which includes completing a form declaring citizenship status. Applicants who present immigration documents are not processed for voter registration.

By Amy Sherman

🤥🤥We rate this statement False.🤥🤥

A Nevada Republican has wrongly suggested that the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles is swelling the voter rolls with

Fact-Checking Central

25/10/2022

21/10/2022

20/10/2022

19/10/2022

23/09/2022

09/09/2022

Address

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share