Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg West  Bloomberg  February 25, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EST

6:00 pm
one of the san bernardino shooters. apple says the f.b.i. is seeking dangerous powers for the court. the case may set a precedent for smart phone access. a poll shows republican presidential frontrunner donald trump with a substantial lead in southern states ahead of next tuesday's super tuesday contest. trump is backed by 37% of likely primary voters in alabama, arkansas, georgia, oklahoma, tennessee, and virginia. senators marco rubio and ted cruz are tied at 20%. navy governor brian sandoval, mentioned as a possible ndidate to replace antonin scalia, told the white house today he isn't interested in the job. an official said president obama doesn't plan on an announcement about guantanamo while in cuba. chancellor angela merkel
quote
6:01 pm
brokered a deal that would speed up the processing of requests for asylum. from bloomberg world eadquarters in new york, i'm mark crompton. > ♪ >> i'm cory johnson in for emsexem this is "bloomberg west." coming up, the stakes getting higher for the battle on encryption. plus, german officials want facebook's help controlling anti-refugee posts. whose job is it to police the internet and yahoo in the spotlight. what comes next when we start with the company's former chief operating officer.
6:02 pm
an epic day of comments from both sides in the battle for encryption. pple is insisting the court is overstepping its thorget. it says "this is not the case of one isolated iphone but the case of the justice and the f.b.i. speak -- seeking through the ."urts a dangerous power former f.b.i. director james comey said before congress, this case has posed the toughest time yet in his time. tim, this was an amazing day when you saw this filing from apple powerfully written at the same time we have testimony coming from the head of the f.b.i. >> very poifrl language from apple essentially accusing the f.b.i. of trying to hijack the
6:03 pm
national debate on privacy using the powers of the court. meanwhile the head of the f.b.i. telling powers of congress they weren't trying to send a broad message but rather which was dealing with one individual -- individual issue of trying to get into this iphone. of course, he acknowledged that perhaps this would send a broader issue but he said this was about this phone. >> again, the comey testimony happening. it was a bunt hearing but congress had a big interest in this issue. >> yeah, we also say -- saw microsoft talking about how they were going to support apple and one of their executives bringing out a near-100-year-old adding machine to illustrate the statute that the f.b.i. is trying to use to make apple hack into this phone is from that period and trying to make the case that maybe the laws need to be updated to this.
6:04 pm
cory: fascinating story. we'll come back to you later. let's look at the detailed look at the legal arguments on both sides of this case. here's what f.b.i. director james comey said on thursday. >> the great thing about this is, this isn't us going and opening people's phones. it's us going to a constitutional court asking for permission under the fourth amendment to do something so it would be a precedent in the sense that a court would look to it to see whether it was useful but the framework is under our rule of law. ry: a curelt filing, the government rejected, saying just this once, just this phone. but the government knows this is not true. are inher pending issues
6:05 pm
court. joining us now, brian white. the argument here is about fighting terrorism. that's what the government is putting forward, that this is about one phone and it's about stopping terrorists. what do you think about apple's response saying it's not about terrorism and not about one phone. >> apple has quite a good response. one is it's an unreasonable burden on the comply. the ruling is suggesting it will take two to four weeks and six to 10 engineers to write in code. the second thing is that's infringing on their information rights by cold being speech. they have a strong case but at the same time the justice department didn't pick this battle if they didn't think they had a strong case. this is not back door. this is someone saying this is a strong issue, someone edge --
6:06 pm
engaged in terrorism and we need access here. cory: this notion of cold as free speech seems novel but it's not. there is history there. >> there definitely lift -- history there. a lot of cold functions as speech. it -- code functions as speech. it gets shared between people as much as between exumpletse it's almost like you are talking to other programmers and to the computer. cory: and indeed it does something. it performs a punks that -- naungs expresses something in a certain way. >> that's entirely correct. cory: this sort of first amendment argument, the code expresses speech, but this very notion that the company is being forced to open up this thing that should be kept private. is the privacy argument enough
6:07 pm
to carry the day here? >> it's not in my view because in reality, we see privacy all the time. if certain facts and evident is put forth, we find ourselves in a situation yes wr privacy has been to be seeded for our safety. we do -- creeded for our safety. we do it with search warrants, when we allow agencies to go inside of homes and bang accounts. this is post a crime that's been committed. this is analogous to a crime happening and they just cleaned up the mess and there's no police data. everybody goes home and no more big -- digging. cory: what do you mean? -- that ange is that's there's no juffled jurisdiction. effects li kaifu -- effect
6:08 pm
you'vely the tech community has said we are going to private people with a advice, and it's set up in a way that law enforcement, even with a legal court order cannot get to that inspection so much time, particularly in the past, we haven't been reliant upon an infrastructure that required us to get into people's advicings. now you're basically saying, we don't have the built because we've washed our hands of it. cory: does the government need this information >> i don't think, i don't know the afpblets i do think the government needs a way into this nafferings going forward. you can't set up a paradigm and take am and microsoft completely out of this.
6:09 pm
i think ultimately you'll see dart warner and respect mccall's proposal about this blue ribbon case emerges. this issue goes one of two ways. t goes to the supreme court. cory: benjamin franklin said those who sacrifice liberty for security neither zeept neither is the privacy sack sante as part of our society? >> we've been fighting about this all week. my sense is thank you give inch, the while is going to get teafpblet once this is out of the box, other people are going to use it. this is a really big deal. there's another comply cathe narcotic, which is that it's possible to create very
6:10 pm
difficult to kraken crippings. to we use shall this as a country? trying to ensure that people have tocknologies that go welcome -- back doomplets that seems to be what everybody is digging their heels in to fight. that's not weeks but months or years to work that out. cory: richard, is the slope that slippery? >> historically i think one of the things that's in the backdrop here is the n. is. a. snowden scandal. it still stings. historically we've always had a standard that had to be met before you could infringe on privacy and what we found with the n.a.s. is that things have gotten out of hand. and that happened behind closed doors. that was not part of a
6:11 pm
politician discussion. >> that's right. it's been a few years now but for us, for american society, it's like we're really not ready to give you a second set of keys yet. cory: right, interesting. i want to keep you around and talk about the business impact el woo. el took about what this means for apple's rep days. -- reputation. plenty more when "bloomberg west" returns. ♪. 2kd ♪
6:12 pm
6:13 pm
6:14 pm
cory: let's get back to the main story, that debate over encryption and apple fighting back. a strongly worded court filing suggesting the u.s. government is overstepping its authority. will this save the company's bottom line? and ith me, brian cheg brian white. chief analytics officer. dan, can they do this? do you think am has the ability to simply change the code to make it available to the government with a couple of engineers in a couple of days? >> first of all, i think they can do it, i don't think they should do it and i think for all the reasons you guys discussed but i don't know that it takes a couple of days but they deliberately built this so that others can't do it.
6:15 pm
so it cannot even be that easy for them to do it. they have inside information, the code, but i think they have an obligation to fight it. let the courts decide but i wouldn't if i were them. cory: you're mr. cybersecurity, can they do this? >> yes, it's going to take them two to four weeks, six to 10 people. the issue is what's once they do it and that code gets out? then everybody knows it's out there. current models you wouldn't be able to do this on. this is an older phone. cory: dan, you're c.e.o. of an important company in silicon valley. why do you think apple shouldn't do this? > first of all, you have the obligation of the c.e.o. of a global company. imagine that you were going to
6:16 pm
allow the united states government to get into their phones. then imagine you're in the rest of the world and the chinese and russian governments want this and everywhere you go -- you don't get to say only america gets it. your heart my want to say that and as a parent, as a father, anything you can do to fight terrorism, you want to do but you don't get to make that choice for hundreds of thousands of users that didn't have that expectation. also, once they're done, there's no reason to say that others want want it for their terrorism, which could be anti-american. if they lose, they lose but at least they have the responsibility to make the fight, have the detective, let the public decide. >> the business implication of the n.s.a.'s spying policy, as engines pogsed by edward -- exposed by edward snowden are substantial. and we saw companies from crisco
6:17 pm
tomicrosoft talking -- cisco microsoft talking about the damage it had done. >> i would say i think you can see the repercussions of that still today. the tech sector had to run away from the u.s. government post-snowden. good corporate citizenenship. you can't resolve these anymore. the tech companies have learned we have to have these fights in public. the issue is, at some point i think their position does become untenable because something big does happen. is it a bigger terrorist event? at some point this wall does start to get chipped away at. it's going to go to this commission because you need people to think about is there
6:18 pm
any other way? is it all or nothing if that's the case, maybe we let the courts decide or make the tech community stands firm but we don't know the last chapter on this yet. cory: that's for sure. we've heard of other companies lining up with apple on this. what do you think the top-line number of international sales for companies is that a risk? >> if you're the only company that has to do this, i can mack everybody in the world saying -- imagine everybody in the world saying don't buy apple, buy us, and you want your privacy protected. mr. cook is fighting on his behalf of his ability as a c.e.o. we can't all just do it as an american citizen. but yeah, if you feel like the company that you guy from rolls over and gives the government --
6:19 pm
every candidate that's running and winning right now is wrunging against the government originally 75% of the people said they should do it. now it's down to 50%. i don't think the government has the people on their side. >> i'm just concerned about the impact on the american business. >> around the world it would be devastating but i think around the united states it could be big. cory: i think you're right. would public opinion sway one away? /11. it were 1 is it facebook's job to police race snitch and you can will be to all of us or most of us, listen to "boomer advantage" on
6:20 pm
loomberg radio in the u.s. and canadian. or on sires xm radio. -- sirius radio. more "bloomberg west" in just a minute. ♪
6:21 pm
6:22 pm
bnb has made an admission. 500 listing from ver 600 hosts, the -- with which tempered expectations. as they face criticism that its platform is unregulated hotels. high level talks about the european union are continuing. they met with brussels on thursday.
6:23 pm
neither side offered details on the meeting. the final state of the probe, google faces its own shopping comparison services over rivals. they're flaunting google's contribution the european economy. another c.e.o. holding talks in europe. facebook c.e.o. mark zuckerberg and angela managerle. -- merkel. they're hoping the social met work with help. joining us now, sarah. it's interesting for zuckerberg and facebook. >> it is and facebook, honestly, they can't do much about it. when you're in a position like facebook is, like twitter is, where you're trying to be a bags of free speech, you have -- bastion of free speech, you have
6:24 pm
billions of posts every day and you're really relying on your users telling you which ones violate conditions and make people feel uncomfortable so i'm betting what zuckerberg told merkel is we're doing what we can but we have to do it based on coward force responses from our users. kevin: it seems to be the opinion of zuckerberg over the years that the role of facebook is not to police, let people be whoever they want to be in whatever way, with the exception of certain transvestites with their inability to each themselves that way. but facebook says let god start this -- sort this out, let's put all the information out there. do they have the screening capability to fight porn and things like that? >> nadeau, so if you did try to pose something that had a copyright issue with it, for
6:25 pm
example. sometimes they can prevent you from posting it entirely but they really try to err on the side of only doing that when it's totally illegal and they know for sure. in the regular course of people sharing on facebook, they want as few barriers as possible and they do rely on after the fact and that's something that twitter has grappled with as well. you know, the news earlier in year that they got rid of more that be -- than 100,000 accounts of isis on twitter. so this has always been somewhere where you really have to be reactionary as opposed to proactive, that when we get into the world of artificial intelligence we'll go deeper. i know zuckerberg is excited about the possibilities of that. maybe that has implications of how they could sort through the billions of posts every day and say is this worthy of being on
6:26 pm
facebook? not yet. cory: facebook also coming out siding with apple and its case over free speech and privacy. >> absolutely. they're one of the companies signing a brief to be submitted next week in favor of apple's stance on the issue. cory: sarah, she covers facebook. thank you so much, we appreciate it. still to come, what's next? we'll head to washington for details on the key dates to watch in this battle over privacy. plus, pressure mounts on yahoo and the c.e.o. can this company placate invest snow showers we'll discuss. ♪ cory:
6:27 pm
6:28 pm
6:29 pm
this is "bloomberg west." i'm cory johnson. voted tos after sharp
6:30 pm
sell itself to foxconn, foxconn said, not so much. our reporter joins us now from hong kong. what happened? reporter: within hours, in fact, of sharp announcing that they were going to give the deal to foxconn, foxconn then came out and said it was going to delay signing the deal because of what they called "new material information." citingll street journal" people familiar with the matter says this is related to contingent liabilities. the nikkei says the deal might take a few more days. there have been questions raised about whether the deal may go ahead at all. foxconn says it is reviewing the information. received this new information on tuesday morning, a day before the shark board --
6:31 pm
sharp board was due to meet. that theyold sharp were not going to sign, that they were going to postpone so they could review this information. on wednesday and said they would give the deal to foxconn. cory: that is some gamesmanship. this puts them in the lead position. it was very clever of them, but they are not making any friends over there at sharp. sharp has not had any comments on this comment from foxconn. as we look at the deal they had announced yesterday, they had said that foxconn would take a 65.9% stake in the company. brand wouldp remain an independent company, all the foxconn would have wouldl of it, and foxconn buy shares at ¥118 apiece.
6:32 pm
the deal is worth about $4.3 billion. it was a pretty hard-fought deal. does lookwill deal like it is in the air. we are waiting to hear further. cursei don't know how to in japanese, but i'm sure they made up for it at sharp headquarters yesterday. thank you very much. our global news, 24 hours a day, powered by 2400 journalists like newsroomsfrom 150 around the world. in the newsroom, i'm cory johnson. to turn to our top story, apple laying out its arguments against the fbi's request to
6:33 pm
unlock one of the iphones of one of the san bernardino terrorists. we seen fbi -- we have seen fbi director james comey testified. what happens next in this battle? annualrrow, apple's shareholder meeting. we will be looking from any comments -- for any comments from shareholders in cupertino. next week, we expect apples top lawyer and -- apple's top lawyer and the head of the fbi to be on capitol hill for a hearing. march 3 is the deadline for apple allies to file their briefs of support. mid-march,about another apple event for their products. a lot ofselling products. the annual spring event is around this time of year. toward the end of march, we are expecting to have a court
6:34 pm
hearing on these issues. cory: apple said they were developing a phone that would be impossible to do the things that the government is asking for right now. maybe we will see that in these new products. >> the issue here is that -- silicon valley would make the case that technology is developing and changing at such a rapid pace that it is outpacing where the law is, and that is why there needs to be a national policy discussion, rather than done in the courts. cory: we might see this play out on the political trail as well, don't you think? >> absolutely. we are going into super tuesday. big contest next week. then we start going to other early states. the campaigns are only going to get more heated as it becomes do or die for many. cory: we miss you here in san francisco. glad to have you with us everywhere. moving onto yahoo! and the rush to sell its core business.
6:35 pm
the management team does not seem to have the same sense of urgency as some of the investors. earlier this week, "time" added its - time, inc., added name to the list of potential investors. -- we've seen some news about depleting numbers of homepage, mail, the most valuable assets at yahoo!, outside of alibaba cash. what other assets do you think the other companies might want? mighthink each of them>> want something different. if they are a private equity firm, they would be interested in how much cash flow it could generate in the next couple of years. i don't know that that's going to be about reinventing out who, as much as it -- reinventing yahoo!, as much as it's going to be about cutting costs and higher margin. each one will have a different perspective.
6:36 pm
verizon has aol. there are properly lot of synergies -- there are probably a lot of synergies between the two. yahoo!the assets that acquired over the last couple years were available for sale. aol could have bought them. they opted not to. i don't really know. if you take them at their word, which is all i have, i think they would consolidate the media site and try to have more content come through the pipe. verizon is trying to have a smart pipe instead of a dumb pipe. that is there articulated reason. comcast doesn't have significant digital asset play. they have extraordinary assets in nbc. they have a great pipe and they have great programming, but it could be an entrée for them into the digital category and start to have a basis for them to build on. i think everybody will look at it differently. cory: are there enough assets they could sell off to make
6:37 pm
investors happy, but still have a yahoo! that would be different from the bigger entity? dan: it has been 10 years since i've been there. one of the things i think is misunderstood is, it is not like you can sell off a channel. cory: you can sell sports. you can sell finance. dan: you would have to separated from all of the servers, separate all of the ads. what would you be selling? there were ads that run on yahoo! sports that were not sold on yahoo! sports. what part of the servers would be going? hosting fees and all of those things -- it's not as easy to separate the channels. one of the reasons yahoo! did not sell the channels is they end up shutting them down. it's not like ebay where they could sell off skype or separate out paypal. those were very different businesses, separate units. yahoo! does not have separate units that way.
6:38 pm
even when yahoo! said it was going to make cuts, it is talking about selling real estate and things of that nature. i think there is a misunderstanding of what is actually sellable as a separate, independent business unit inside of you who, which -- of yahoo!, which there aren't very many. cory: is there a price at which yahoo! could acquire you as ceo? happy am extraordinarily right now. cory: that is not the question i ask. -- asked. you have been asked this question a lot in the past few weeks. dan: they have had feet of activists -- had two activists, multiple ceos, a hostile takeover bid. the company needs to reinvent itself outside of the public light. anything that had one billion users -- we may not be able to articulate
6:39 pm
why people go to yahoo!, but people do. if you have those assets, what could you do with them that represents where the industry is going, not where the industry has been? try to trickle down on brand advertising -- trying to trickle on brando triple down advertising may not be the direction for the future. i think yahoo! could have a very bright future. i think it just needs to be left alone to execute on doing that. for whatever reason, when a aall -- for whatever reason, small market cap company is getting a lot of attention every day. cory: so many of us have worked there, including you and me. i'm taking that as not a no. it is possible to change a fan belt whilst the engine runs, but it is hard. that's what you guys are doing.
6:40 pm
that's what the stock price looks like right now. company is excited about where it is going, but it is difficult to change the company. yahoo! is going through the difficulties. going from a transition of a traditional business, textbook rental company, to a pure digital business into a high-growth, plus-30% grower, focusing on young peter -- people and education is a wonderful mission for us to be on. the fact that we have actually millionions -- 4 students -- we are trying to do it in a public light and go through a transition where we say revenues are going down before they go back up. but the actual chegg services, we see the middle range already. four years ago, they did not exist. the future is really bright for
6:41 pm
chegg. just being able to explain the story in a volatile market while you are going through change is hard to do. cory: is it the investor base? the investor base that initially invested in a textbook rental company is not what invested in a digital company. right now, small-cap companies are having a great deal of difficulty getting their message out to anybody in a volatile marketplace. one, going through a transition. the hard work has been done. the business is a high-growth, high-margin business. we went from losing $18 million plus $5illion to million. we are excited about the future. what it says is on-demand education is a powerful place to be, and almost nobody is focusing on it. going directly to the student, giving them high-quality, low-cost products, where they can get them directly is a very big business. cory: much different business
6:42 pm
than renting them out. dan: it is easier to rent them then to read them -- than to re ad them. textbook rentals have changed the publishing industry forever. textbook companies have had to go through bankruptcy. we did not intend to do that to those companies, but it just shows you how powerful it is. we deliver over 6.5 million textbooks per year. our digital services had over one million subscribers. we only have two of them so far. cory: dan rosensweig, always great to see you. coming up next on "bloomberg west," new numbers for electric cars. sales predicted to soar. could it be enough to tip the scales in terms of the worlds next oil crisis -- world's next oil crisis? shares of baidu are up.
6:43 pm
investments beyond search and advertising. those efforts are beginning to bear some fruit. more "bloomberg west" next. ♪
6:44 pm
6:45 pm
tesla. a legal fight involving general motors and indiana. lawmakers siding with a bill that would stop the electric car company from selling its vehicles directly to consumers. indiana voted to send the bill to a summer study session, summer school, tabling it. being thesed gm of driving force behind the new legislation. they are facing off to bring lower-priced electric market -- vehicles to market soon.
6:46 pm
causing concern for big oil. unsubsidized electric cars will cars intch gas-powered as little as six years. the question -- how much oil demand will be affected by this disruption and put it change the rules around selling oil -- and could it change the rules around selling oil. we have so many automakers already making it a lot of -- making electronic vehicles. we talk about gm. -- sellingd electronic vehicles and making them cheaper and cheaper. >> the question is when will electric eels reach mass-market -- electric vehicles reach mass-market production. the next sixut for years, the component prices of the electric vehicles -- the
6:47 pm
battery makes up about 1/3 of the cost of the car. as battery packs continue to fall, we think by 2022 electric vehicles will be cost competitive with their internal combustion counterparts, and that's when you start to see growth really take off. exponential growth. cory: why are battery prices coming down so much? tom: because electric vehicles are already starting to be adopted. you see a lot of investment from people like elon musk, with the giga factory in nevada. there is additional investment happening all over the world in battery prices. fall, youtery prices are going to start to see electric vehicles compete. there is one example right now of an electric vehicle that is competing on price, and that is the model s. the model s is a very expensive car, but it is competing with ferraris and bugattis. cory: they lose money on every
6:48 pm
single one, and that's not a sustainable business model. tom: they are losing money because they are investing in the model 3. they will unveil it next month. cory: those costs are capitalized mostly. what about the surge of lithium? isn't there a headwind that there isn't a ton of lithium, and we might not end up with entire electric vehicle fleets in the world? tom: we did a deep dive into all -- elements of the battery components of the battery. they will only require about 1% of the world's reserves, less than 1% of the world's reserves by the year 2040, so those are not concerns. cory: as we look out to the future, do you think it is going to have an effect on the exxon mobil and the chevron's of the world? tom: i can tell you that they
6:49 pm
don't think it will have an effect. what we wanted to do was look at it and say, how quickly could electric vehicles be adopted and how quickly could that start to affect oil demand? if you look at -- when a new technology is adopted, take iphone. once the iphone became relatively price competitive with other phones and was a superior product, demands have shifted overnight. it suddenly becomes not even a question that you are going to buy a flip phone, for example. when are we going to reach that point with the electric car? right now, electric vehicles are growing at about 60% annual growth rate, and that's an interesting number. that's the same annual growth ford tot took fourth -- become the mass-market vehicle in the early-1900's. it's also what tesla is forecasting for its own sales through 2020. growth rate ofal
6:50 pm
60% going forward, you end up getting an oil displacement of about 2 million barrels per year as early as 2023. that's 2 million barrels per day of demand. cory: the one thing we know about tesla forecasts is tesla does not hit its forecasts. we are going to watch. fantastic report. we appreciate it. it looks like -- take a look at the future of the vr and sports. you are looking at it. virtual, case matches, -- page matches, -- cage matche s, virtual reality. coming up next. ♪
6:51 pm
6:52 pm
cory: it your -- if you are like me, you have often wondered what it would be like to go head-to-head with some of the biggest fighters in mma. or is the or -- bellat
6:53 pm
latest to set its sights on vr. you are a former mma fighter, right? >> check out my guns. out. sun's out, guns talk about this sport as it relates to vr. theellator mma is one of first mma leagues to take this approach. does it make sense for us to live screen -- stream the actual fight in vr? no. because traditional tv already does that. they want to take fans were tv cannot take you, in the po-fight, the post five, -- st-fight, the walk-out. it's one man or woman against another in a cage.
6:54 pm
they are prepping to get beaten to a pulp. there is a lot of intensity in rituals and trainings that goes in. cory: did you try this out? selina: i tried it out before the fight. pregame. it was definitely disorienting. it is rudimentary. you can see some of the pixelation. it left me wanting a bit more. when i took off the headset, i was weirded out. you really do feel like you are in your own world, watching these fighters go about their day. cory: i would think this sport is perfect for vr. it would be even better than watching it on tv. selina: i think it really depends. live tv coverage of sports is heavily produced. we have spent decades perfecting this. all of the best angles, the best shots. you gete ever tried vr, control of what you are seeing, but you are not directed where
6:55 pm
to look. you could be looking at some fan behind you eating popcorn and you might miss the winning punch for winning shot. -- winning punch or winning shot. cory: if i'm in the ring with ronda rousey, i don't want to look at somebody watching -- eating popcorn. how do they get paid? selina: they are hoping to get some of the cord cutters. another is sponsorship and add opportunities. we can watch -- and ad opportunities. we can imagine a future where you will be able to interact with whatever products they are selling. that is a huge opportunity. going forward, they will see more and more creative ways to use this to get the big bucks. cory: i will see you in the cage soon, i hope. aile we wrap up the hour, quick recap of our top stories. apple throwing down the gauntlet, its first formal opposition to the law
6:56 pm
enforcement officials trying to get them to hack into an iphone, even as protesters show they are on apple's side. the world's most valuable company taking on the united states government. tomorrow, all the latest details as it happens. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg west" from san francisco. we will see you tomorrow. ♪
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york, this is "charlie rose." -- charlie: kevin spacey is here. season four of "house of cards" premieres on march 4. here is a look. >> you have no idea what it means to have nothing. you don't value what we have achieved. i have testified for everything my entire life -- i have had to

90 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on