Our Prize, The Narrative - Tonight on SurrealPolitiks

SurrealPolitiks S01E010 – Our Prize, The Narrative

Here at SurrealPolitiks, when speaking of power, there is a well reasoned tendency to speak of matters pertaining to electoral victory. This on account of the fact that the State is the ultimate arbiter of disputes, and its capacity to use force without repercussion renders State power the supreme means of imposing one’s will upon society.

But we have been careful to note from time to time that much happens before election day. The inner workings of the Party have featured most prominently in our prior discussions, as one example.

Of course, as Andrew Breitbart famously noted, politics is downstream from culture. Culture is a many faceted thing, but at the center of culture’s impact on politics, are the stories we tell ourselves.

And since few of us are the creators of these stories, they are in large part the stories we are told by others. The stories might be true or false, and while their veracity is by no means irrelevant, it is rather besides the point as to whether or not they impact our politics. If people believe it, this will be reflected in culture, and it will transmit to politics, and ultimately, to State imposition.



It might go without saying that the Left has enjoyed near total dominance in this arena for as long as many of us have been alive, and near certainly for as long as any of us have been paying attention to politics. There are a lot of reasons for this, not the least of them ethnic in origin, and those are best discussed elsewhere.

Today I want to discuss reclaiming the narratives of our politics. If you get to decide what people believe, then the outcome of the election is rather besides the point. The narrative shapes the conversation, and the conversation dictates the terms of the debate. If the people are left to choose in a term of years between two candidates who are equally immersed in your narrative, then the outcome of that contest is rather besides the point. You won long before the primary.

I have a couple of prominent examples of this to discuss.

One was a story that brought me great joy to discover. I had, years ago, written a story about an abortionist who bragged graphically about the horrors she carries out on a daily basis.

Someone had asked her on Twitter if she hears the screams of the children she murders, to which she responded

“You know fetuses can’t scream, right? I transect the cord 1st so there’s really no opportunity, if they’re even far enough along to have a larynx. I won’t apologize for performing medicine. I’m also a ‘uterus ripper outer,’ if that’s how you’d like to describe hysterectomy,”


I just found out that, while I was without Internet access, she had he medical license suspended pending an investigation. She was allowed to return to practice, but in the wake of the Roe reversal, her Alabama practice is in jeopardy and she claims to live in fear.

The Guardian wrote up a 4,100+ piece, making her out to be a hero under assault. I won’t trouble you to read the whole thing on the air, but I will provide some choice excerpts and discuss the implications.

The story is titled “She was one of Alabama’s last abortion doctors. Then they came for everything she had”  tells us the angle from the beginning.

She is an “abortion doctor”. Doctor is a title of authority, which stands in contrast to what she is called in conservative media, an “abortionist” – a term Leftists hate because it conveys a tone of illicit behavior. The term, “abortion doctor” informs us that abortions are something doctors do, which is by definition totally legal and appropriate and righteous. To prevent a doctor from performing their work is to obstruct access to health care, which is something that is even prohibited in warfare. Only a very special sort of villain does this kind of thing.

The subheading reads “Dr Leah Torres has endured the ire of the anti-abortion movement without backing down – but now she faces her most daunting challenge“.

Here we are made to know just who our special villain is, the anti-abortion movement. Not the pro-life movement, which is too flattering of a term. These people are killers, they don’t care about life. Only the good doctor does.  Our hero has endured their terror for eternity, and always risen to the task, but now, a new danger lurks, and it is of an even more sinister nature.

The story, written by Poppy Noor, begins as follows;

Dr. Leah Torres doesn’t tell people what she does when she meets them, which makes it hard to make friends. She removes her name from every piece of trash before she puts it out for recycling, in case people walking past see her name and find out where she lives. If a package addressed to her arrives on her porch, she calls everyone she knows to identify who sent it before she opens it – it could be a bomb.


Do note that, there’s no evidence that anyone has tried to blow Ms. Torres up. And the informed reader doubts Ms. Torres actually goes through all of this trouble.

To begin, Ms. Torres is hardly anonymous. Recall that the whole reason we are having this discussion is because she has intentionally drawn as much attention to herself as possible on Twitter. She uses the most offensive language she can find to advocate for her behavior, with the conscious and premeditated intent of drawing the ire of our villain, the anti-abortion movement. She does this, and then she is afraid to throw away garbage on the off chance that some anti abortion zealot might be going through garbage cans on her street and discover “Ah ha! She’s the one who said mean things on Twitter! Now I know where to send the bomb!”

How often do you receive a package on your porch with no concept of how it might have arrived? Does Ms. Torres forget about her Amazon orders placed after too much wine, and then go through her Rolodex, furiously spinning away at her rotary phone calling everyone she knows trying to determine if they’ve dropped off a case of phone books? The story is preposterous from the first sentence, and any actual journalist would probe at such an obvious fraud, but that is not what the Guardian has set out to do.

What is being done here is to set the tone of this lengthy article. We are clearly discussing the protagonist of the story. Danger lurks ubiquitously for our hero, which causes her to live in secret. That a fugitive or mob boss might live similarly is of no consequence here, because we know from the title that our protagonist is a good doctor who has been standing up to villains.

In the very next paragraph, we are informed of the true nature of the threat Ms. Torres actually lives under.

Once, coming back from work in the piercing August Alabama sun, she noticed a gray sedan parked in her driveway. Instinctively, she fled to a neighbor’s house – she barely knew him – but asked if he could walk her home anyway. The car turned out to be a stranger’s; the driver had just pulled over to send a text message. “Still, you never know,” says Torres, her big, almond-shaped eyes conveying concern.


So, when Ms. Torres tried to conjure a story in which she was actually in danger, this was the best she could do. She told the reporter that one single time, a strange car was parked near her home, so she went to a stranger’s house, apparently unafraid of this prospect, and in the end it was a non-issue. Which makes the next paragraph begin comically…

She’s not paranoid. Torres is an abortion doctor in the state of Alabama, where abortion is now illegal except in life-threatening situations. She’s one of the many doctors increasingly targeted by lawmakers, protesters, conservative news outlets and social media, even more so now that abortion is no longer legal in much of the US.


Well, she is, in fact, paranoid. Some guy stopped near her home to avoid texting and driving, and she panicked. There is not any evidence that she has ever been in any danger at all, but if we are to believe her story, and I’m not saying we should, then Ms. Torres is most certainly a paranoiac.

But in this paragraph it is revealed what Ms. Torres is actually concerned about. Her activity is now illegal. She may well have been afraid of the grey sedan, but not because it may have been transporting a suicide bomber. She more likely feared arrest.

Ms. Torres does not live like a fugitive because criminals are targeting her. She is living like a fugitive because she has been committing crimes, and the law now recognizes those crimes as such in Alabama. Ms. Torres, and her interlocutor at the Guardian, view these laws as illegitimate. They are describing this woman who has spent her career doing what is now illegal in Alabama, as a victim of State repression.

Of course, any regular reader of the Guardian might note that they take a rather different tone with law abiding people who, for example, legally speak about subject matter they think should be outlawed. They are not noble crusaders for freedom of speech, but criminals who have found a loophole called the Constitution through which they continue their criminal behavior unhindered by the law. The heroes of those stories are the tech companies and financial institutions who rush in to do what the State has failed to do.

For all these complaints about the criminal element, it is the State, which in nearly all other cases is beloved by the Guardian and Ms. Torres, which makes the good doctor live in fear.

Torres has long been in the public eye. As a proud, loud abortion provider who is well known on social media, she has made many enemies. But since the state of Alabama took her medical license away, dragging her through a $115,000 legal battle that put her out of work for seven months, fear follows her around, like a stranger ready to snatch her in the night.


It was 11am on a Thursday when two men presented themselves in the lounge of the West Alabama Women’s Center, asking to see the clinic’s doctor. Torres led the two men down the hall to one of the offices. Inside, the air was stuffy, the windows carpeted by heavy 1940s drapes that deny all sun – a helpful privacy feature.

The men revealed themselves to be investigators sent by the state. One solemnly informed Torres of her predicament: she was being stripped of her license to practice medicine, pending an investigation by the Alabama board of medical examiners.

Torres was being accused of fraud. Scott Sides, one of the investigators, informed her she had made errors in her application for a medical license. The hearing was set for 21 December 2020, four months in the future, when she would be able to argue her case. Until then, she couldn’t practice as a doctor.

Conspicuously absent from the story so far is the result of the case against Ms. Torres. The Guardian apparently thinks it not worthy of note whether or not Ms. Torres committed fraud. She was accused of fraud, and we are informed by the tone that the government agents who served her with the notice are the villains. She is a doctor today, and the reader is to infer from this that the accusation was false. This is glossed over 3,121 words into our 4,100 word story much later, and does nothing to inform the reader even at this late stage.

But the accusation was not false, and Ms. Torres habitually lies in public and in private about her life, as we are informed by the fine folks at Live Action.

To begin, the Guardian has been conspicuously silent about the fact that part of the clinic’s problems stem from their being held liable for the death of a 29 year old patient named April Lowery in May of 2020. This happened three months before investigators discovered that Ms. Torres had lied on her medical license application.

When your clinic is held liable for the death of a patient, it is not a witch hunt when people begin investigating your credentials, but the Guardian is deceiving its readers by leading them to think this was something other than what it was.

Her license, as it turns out was a temporary one, and it was revoked mere days after she began her practice at the clinic held liable for the death.

Torres began working in early August 2020, only to learn on August 26 that her temporary license had been revoked and that she’d been ordered by the Alabama Board of Medical Examiners to “immediately CEASE and DESIST from the practice of medicine in the State of Alabama.”

The cease and desist letter read, “the Board presently has evidence in its possession that the continuance in practice of LEAH N. TORRES, M.D. may constitute an immediate danger to her patients and/or the public.”

The letter cited multiple instances of suspected fraud in Torres’ application for licensure, including responding ‘No’ to a question about whether her staff privileges at a hospital had ever previously been revoked or otherwise altered when in fact, “[her] staff privileges at a hospital or healthcare facility had been revoked, suspended, curtailed, limited, or placed under conditions restricting [her] practice.”

The letter also listed that Torres answered ‘No’ to a question about whether she had ever faced medical malpractice allegations, when in fact, “a medical malpractice action relating to [her] performance of professional service was settled on or about August 28, 2018.” The letter further suggested Torres committed fraud by answering ‘No’ to a question about past psychological or behavioral issues impacting her practice of medicine, when in fact, “on or about March 13th, 2019, [Torres], through counsel, raised the issue of a mental, emotional, nervous, or behavioral disorder or condition as a defense, mitigation, or explanation for your actions in the course of a judicial proceeding in the United States District Court for the District of Utah.”

The letter went on to contend that Torres provided “false, misleading, or untruthful information” regarding dates of employment, claiming that she was employed during a certain time period when she was not. The Board further noted that she had been found to have “…violate[d] the high standards of honesty, diligence, prudence, and ethical integrity demanded from physicians licensed to practice in Alabama…” A hearing was set for December of 2020. In the meantime, Dr. Torres continued to work at the facility in a non-medical role listed on the facility’s website as the “Clinical Services Administrator.”

According to a statement by the chairman of the Medical Licensure Commission of Alabama, the hearing on December 21, 2020, additionally addressed a statement on Torres’ application that she intended to work with COVID-19 patients, though in fact she was being hired to commit abortions at an abortion facility.

The chairman’s statement regarding the hearing summarized that “there were elements in some of Dr. Torres’s answers in her application which… were suggestive of deceptive answers and a lack of ethical integrity expected of practicing physicians in Alabama. Thus, the Commission directs that Dr. Torres must attend an ethics course.” Torres additionally had to pay an administrative fine of $4,000. In January, Torres completed the ethics class, and in March her Alabama medical license was approved.

A recent update to a local CBS affiliate suggests that Torres is still deceiving the public. While Torres claimed to have received a letter from the ASBME informing her that the actions against her “should never have been taken,” and the GoFundMe she used to raise funds for her legal fees reads similarly, a statement from the ASBME’s General Counsel contradicts these claims.

“Dr. Torres’ statement that she received a letter from the Board stating that ‘(this) action should never have been taken’ is indicative of the deceptive answers the Board charged her with providing in her license application,” wrote the ASBME. “No correspondence of this nature was ever sent to her by the Board. We suspect that Dr. Torres is referring to a computer generated letter sent to her by the National Practitioner Data Bank.”

The idea that the Guardian did not understand this when they interviewed Ms. Torres need not be considered. They mentioned the accusation, they framed it as a conspiracy against half the planet’s population then they just moved on without explaining any further.

This is very careful narrative construction. They understood, clearly, that explaining what happened would not have portrayed their protagonist in a positive light, so they just skipped that part, and moved on to something they could frame as very benevolent of Ms. Torres.

Later, we are told of the abortion mill’s patients that;

Historically, most of the clinic’s patients have been Black and low-income. Many were mothers unable to take on the financial burden of a new baby (most people who have an abortion already have children). Less often, they were teenagers who didn’t want to drastically change their life’s course to become a parent.


To the Guardian reader, it goes without saying that black people are the good guys in any story. You, as a Guardian reader, have already heard that most abortions are performed on mothers, but you are reminded anyway, because we must make sure that we invoke motherhood here to provide sympathy for those who procure the now illicit services of Ms. Torres.

If you harbor some racist ideas, you are at least happy that fewer blacks being born, and among the white liberal set there are surely a few of those in the Guardian’s target audience. So whether Ms. Torres is keeping the pests from breeding, or providing a valuable service to the downtrodden, there is something in this paragraph for you.

Ms. Torres, we are informed, started off not as an “abortion doctor” but as an escort. She would help make certain that no child came into this world just because its mother couldn’t get a ride to the abortion clinic. She did this for years, and described it as something she enjoyed.

Immediately after informing us that Ms. Torres was a helpful escort of downtrodden patients, we are again reminded of the evil criminality of the ant-abortion movement;

Alongside the conviviality between escorts and patients, though, was the harassment. Four years after it opened in 1997, the clinic was subject to an arson attack. It was razed to the ground, reopening in the same nondescript business park.

The clinic has been threatened countless times, and even shot at. In 2006, an anti-abortion advocate drove his Nissan Sentra through the building’s front doors and into the waiting room in the early hours of the morning before patients arrived. The culprit said he didn’t want to harm anyone, although he probably wanted to put the clinic out of operation.

And the placement of this reminder is no accident. The next paragraph tells us about the reals subject here.

Then came the onslaught of anti-abortion legislation in Alabama in the late 2000s, which almost shuttered the center. A law requiring hospital permitting privileges for abortion clinics closed the facility for the best part of 2018. There were laws that regulated the use of medication abortion in the clinic, and laws that required a $150,000 ambulance ramp to be fitted to the back of the building (hospitalization is an incredibly rare occurrence).

It was a slow, protracted attack by a thousand laws, regulations and expensive emergency fittings. Owner Gloria Gray would often mentally set a date at which time she’d have to close to clinic for good, she explained in a 2016 documentary. But when that date arrived, she said, “my heart wouldn’t let me do it.”

See what they are doing? The crime sets the tone, and then they slide in the lawful acts of the elected officials. They are the same thing. The 30 year old gun shot, the car wreck, all ancient history, but in the construction of the narrative here, it is important that they be fresh in your mind, placed as a mental conduit between the caring Ms. Torres, and the wicked State which obstructs her benevolent efforts to care for those infected with the dreaded disease called pregnancy.

Ms. Gray, the owner of the clinic, oppressed though she is by the malicious rulers of the land, could not close her clinic, because “my heart wouldn’t let me do it”. You see, abortion is the greatest of all god’s gifts, and the idea that Ms. Gray would allow the laws of man to interfere with God’s greatest work, is preposterous to her.

In 2018, Ms. Gray was ready to leave the abortion business, but not before she found somebody to purchase her asset. The Guardian informs us that this was very difficult, because it is not a lucrative business, thereby informing us that this is not about money for Ms. Gray, who is a saint, and totally above any thought of financial issues.

Interestingly, it was when Alabama banned abortion entirely that Ms. Gray found a buyer.

The bill resulted in $2m worth of donations to the Yellowhammer fund, a prominent local abortion fund in Alabama that went on to take the clinic off Gray’s hands.


Now that we have our protagonist, Ms. Torres, and our Villian, the State of Alabama, let us diver the timeline for some character development in Ms. Torres with an origin story.

Two events defined the lives of Torres’ parents, as far as Torres sees it. Her dad, a first-generation American from a Mexican family who grew up in 1940s Michigan, was so tormented by bullies that by the time he was five, he had forced himself to forget how to speak Spanish. Torres, who is adopted, studied languages during her undergraduate studies. She is now a fluent Spanish speaker, but her dad cannot converse with her in his native tongue.

When Torres was about eight or nine years old, her mom, a chief nursing officer in a Michigan hospital, fought a sexual harassment case at work. Torres was too young to understand what happened, just that it involved male colleagues using inappropriate language of a sexual nature around her mother, and that after her mom raised the issue, she lost her job. Torres’ mother sued the company, and had to relocate for work.

Torres took one lesson from these stories: that at some point in her life she would face discrimination, and that you always fight for what is right.

Right on cue, racism and sexism. The two headed monster of White Supremacy at the heart of this conspiracy against those Ms. Torres cures of their pregnancies.

Ms. Torres was born into this struggle, and so although her profession may be a crime today, it is only to her revolutionary credentials that she persists at her craft.

More than 2300 words into our 4100 word essay, the reader is just now informed of what made Ms. Torres famous.

By the time Torres was in her 30s, the fight she had long been anticipating finally found her. On the way to a conference in Australia, someone sent her an antagonizing tweet, asking her if she heard the screams of the fetuses she aborts.

She hastily fired off a response.

“You know fetuses can’t scream, right? I transect the cord 1st so there’s really no opportunity, if they’re even far enough along to have a larynx. I won’t apologize for performing medicine. I’m also a ‘uterus ripper outer,’ if that’s how you’d like to describe hysterectomy,” she wrote.

By the time she’d landed, it had gone viral. Former Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro shared the tweet, comparing Torres to a James Bond villain. Conservative news outlets like the Daily Caller covered it, misinterpreting it to read that Torres cut vocal cords (which is not part of any standard abortion procedure), when she meant the umbilical cord. People started pulling out of the Australian conference at which Torres was scheduled to speak.

Ah, cancel culture strikes again. Surely you sympathize with our protagonist now, don’t you conservative? Quoting again from the Guardian…

After her viral moment, Torres deleted the tweet. The next week, she was on a flight back to Utah. A few days later, after having been directed not to come into work, she was called to a meeting in a generic-looking conference room she’d never been to before, on the edge of town. An HR person she didn’t know handed her a mutual separation agreement and told her: sign it and you’ll get three months’ severance, or don’t and leave without pay.

She was later chaperoned into her old office to collect her belongings – a mortifying moment in which not a single colleague would look her in the eye. “It felt like I was a criminal. Like I had laundered money or something,” she recalls.

Torres would later sue the Daily Caller for defamation, alleging it had misinterpreted her tweet. The article written about her, and many since, indeed claimed she was referring to vocal cords, which are plural, and not what Torres says she was referencing.

She was awarded $40,000 in damages, and the outlet issued a correction, but she never received an apology. After that, Torres couldn’t find full-time work for a year, until she was offered a job in New Mexico. She refers to that time in her life as a “corporate medicine nightmare”.

This is torturously worded. She was not “awarded $40,000 in damages”. The Daily caller decided that it was cheaper to give her $40,000 than to go to trial, and settled the lawsuit without admitting wrongdoing.

But this is the job of the Guardian, we have our protagonist, Ms. Torres, the Doctor, who was falsely accused of fraud, and defamed by conservative media who issued a correction and paid for their sins. Lest they be accused of fraud themselves, the Guardian carefully words their lies to deceive the reader while being sure not to find themselves on the wrong side of a lawsuit.

Only now that the story is about to conclude, are we informed that;

Torres was not found to have committed any wrongdoing in the malpractice case mentioned, and the issue was settled out of court.



The committee who reviewed the case did not endorse the board’s allegations against Torres, although the report concluded that elements of her answers “were suggestive of deceptive answers and a lack of ethical integrity expected of practicing physicians in Alabama”. As a result, she was instructed to take an ethics course and charged $4,000 in administrative fees to the board.


The Guardian then repeats the lie which was exposed by Live Action;

When the case was removed from the national databank that holds information on medical malpractice against doctors, the following explanation was soberly put: “The action was reversed because the original action should never have been taken.”


That is not the conclusion when a matter is “settled out of court”, and the Guardian knows this all too well, having framed the Daily Caller’s out of court settlement as an admission of guilt. This story was published in March of 2023. The Live Action article exposing the lie was published in September of 2021, and the Guardian makes no mention of the Board’s statement that Ms. Torres is continuing to deceive the public.

Because, in closing, we are reminded that this is not about Ms. Torres at all. She was just the best they could do when seeking a sympathetic victim figure in assailing their real target.

Fifteen months later on 24 June 2022, Alabama’s Human Life Protection Act was finally able to come into effect after Roe v Wade was overturned. Now a busy day at the clinic might mean seeing seven patients, though the clinic previously saw sometimes a hundred patients in a week.

Marty, the operations director, believes Torres’ license suspension was just another way to prevent abortions from taking place in Alabama, before the overturning of Roe put most abortions fully on hold for the foreseeable future .

But Torres’ predicament might become an increasingly common reality for doctors who continue to provide abortions in conservative states – where people will continue to need abortion care in the circumstances they are allowed to – like when they spontaneously miscarry, or go to the ER with life-threatening complications.

“This is what bullying looks like. This is the mob. The far-right, theocratic, Christian nationalist mob,” says Marty. She pauses.

“This is what [anti-abortion] states do. And Alabama hates abortion. This is a tactic that is going to be used on other abortion providers in hospitals, in states that still have care. Everything that happens on abortion, happens in Alabama first,” she says.

In Marty’s view, the state was always looking for a way to be able to shut down the clinic, knowing that it was the most productive one in the state. “They figure out the one pressure point that has the most power over an entire state. Their entire mission is how to hold the most power with the least amount of people,” she says.

They may have finally found that pressure point.

Asked how long the clinic can hold on financially before it has to close, Torres estimates until maybe June.

And so, after Alabama banned abortion, Ms. Torres is still performing abortions in Alabama. She plans to continue doing so for as long as she can receive a check. If that means she has to wonder if the car in front of her house is a cautious motorist or police coming to arrest her for her crimes, then this, after all, is the life she chose. Having been raised on a steady diet of liberal nonsense, from her father’s supposed racist bullying, to her mother’s alleged sexual harassment, Ms. Torres joined the fight by slaughtering the unborn, and she does this all in service to the one true faith of Leftism.

The Guardian, givers of the word, profess the faith and spare their readers the pain of doubt. Never ones to blaspheme, they give their Saint all due praise and call for the evildoers to be punished, be though they may, acting with State sanction.

I read this story with great amusement, and I think it instructive in many ways.

When Ms. Torres is talking about mutilating children before they have a chance to scream, and being a “uterus ripper outer”, she is acting incautiously. She is expending her energy, she is using her power, not building it.

When the Guardian looks for a sympathetic victim, one does not exist. Ms. Torres is the best they can do. So they torture the facts until they confess. They bury the bodies, rather than praising her “high score” as some of the more shocking elements of the Right have done.

And one might say that this is altogether less fun than irritating one’s political opponents online, but, is it surely so?

One doubts many but the faithful read this piece and had their opinions of Ms. Torres changed, but anyone introduced to her, and the subject matter, would have little choice but to assume they were reading about an oppressed victim and a wicked State hell bent on her destruction.

Oh what power we could wield if our narratives could be so portrayed. What if every newspaper in the land told the true story of your humble correspondent and his legal travails. Better yet, what if they glossed over all my many real flaws and errors of judgement. What if I was trained from birth to fight evil like Ms. Torres, and my carceral journeys were only the latest steps in a lifelong struggle for justice.

We might hope that such a day may come, and I’ll appreciate your help to bring it about…

Another pertains to Taylor Lorenz, a Washington Post propagandist who made it her life’s work to destroy the lives of decent people. She doxed the creator of the Libs of TikTok account, in violation of Twitter rules, and rather than be kicked off the platform like the people she targets, she was actively protected by the upper echelons of the company. It turns out Lorenz had a working relationship with Twitter’s censors, and used it to great effect.

Now that Elon Musk has fired most of these people, Twitter is a very different place. Though “hate speech” policies still exist, and one must be careful what one says about subjects like race, Twitter now abounds with videos depicting migrant and inner city crime, as well as entire popular accounts dedicated to showcasing the lunacy of the transgender movement.

Lorenz said Musk was “opening the gates of hell”.

But I would go so far as to say, he is closing them.

All this and more, plus your calls, Ever Monday at 9:30pm Eastern.



If you would like to help finance this high quality production, I try to make this easy enough to do….


Follow me elsewhere, listen, watch, and keep in touch…

Be sure and get subscribed to my newsletter if you haven’t already, and whitelist [email protected] so I don’t end up in your spam trap!


Leave a Reply

Skip to toolbar