Full Playlist of Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard Trial: https://bit.ly/3vbJvXD
Subscribe to my other Youtube channels for even more content!
xQc Reacts: https://bit.ly/3FJk2Il
xQc Gaming: https://bit.ly/3DGwBSF
xQc Clips: https://bit.ly/3p3EFZC
Main Channel: https://bit.ly/3glPvVC
Please subscribe, like and turn on notifications if you enjoyed the video!
Streaming every day on Twitch! https://twitch.tv/xqcow
G-FUEL 'The Juice' ► USE CODE "XQC" FOR 30% OFF - https://gfuel.com/collections/the-juice
Stay Connected with xQc:
►Twitter: https://twitter.com/xqc
►Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/xqcow/
►Discord: https://discord.gg/xqcow
►Instagram: https://instagram.com/xqcow1/
►Snapchat: xqcow1
- WATCH MORE -
Among Us: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9as68PDcqQUGd7erKulABIU
Daily Dose of Internet: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9ZH3cZR0QguDQ7_-2hgVowK
Jackbox Party Games: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9Z-qcdp7jq8UKCjNI0nRH1W
Viewer Picture Reviews: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9YlTaj3ENlo8d-oa65uSSiK
Memes: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9aHzd9UHK6VncJwPuNZ4qqG
Reddit Recap: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9ZLiWPuqd4HU32W63O0n4H4
Jubilee: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKeR9CeyAc9YPzqPwUJPzInpMgcUwdIWQ
Edited by: Daily Dose of xQc
If you own copyrighted material in this video and would like it removed please contact me at one of the following:
https://twitter.com/DailyDoseofxQc
►dailydoseofxqc @gmail.com
#xQc #JohnnyDepp #AmberHeard

On the sixth and seventh, i think they were towards the top. All right is that crosstalk. You testified that you reviewed a number of hashtags that you deemed were negative towards misheard. That's right! Yes, yeah and the before you picked at least the negative ones, uh justice for johnny depp, that's one of them right.

That's right, amber heard as an abuser, that's one of them. That is one of them. We just don't like you amber, that's one of them. That is one of them and the last one was amber turd right.

That is another one. Okay, and these four hashtags you identified and searched for you have, no, you don't believe they have any connection. This guy he's tweaking have no connection to these three waldman statements. Hashtags aren't attack are connected to waldman right well, i did an additional analysis that did show how many of those had waldman connected to them and i found that one out of four of them did right.

But when you were deposed, you were asked whether whether these were related. These particular hashtags were related to any of the walmart statements, and you said no at that time. I said more than that. I did.

I said i said i didn't know and then and then i said um, i'm basing my i'm looking at mr banya's opinion where he says they would be if they were in large number and i'm adopting his opinion and agreeing with him that they must be connected. So you're adopting an opinion. Oh no, this guy is so shaky. I kind of feel i can't feel bad for him because i think he maybe he's good at his job whatever, but whether they have him on on the stand or whatever he's just kind of getting uh.

In this case it doesn't look very convincing. It lacks charisma like by anybody, but you well. I know that mr banya has testified. Okay.

What i'm saying is, i know that mr banya, mr bana's disclosure says that he is expected to come to that opinion right, but the only person who's ever expressed this opinion today in this courtroom. Is you correct? I will, i would know. I haven't watched everything. I've watched you're adopting your own opinion um.

No, i'm adopting the opinion that i read in mr banya's disclosure and that's not the opinion you had during your deposition. I think the problem is that he's, probably very smart. I feel like and very successful what he does and his job is impossible to explain to normans and you're just you're, just if this guy dumbs down everything into something that no one can understand, even something that isn't that not even that valid. It still wins over.

This guy did make reference in my deposition to uh what mr banya said and and that i agreed with it all right, and you indicated in deposition, you didn't take into account statements made in the media correct made in what i could use. You said you did, you did not take into account that statements made in the media media. Yes, in the analysis where i gathered data and decided which data to gather, i did not take into account statements in the media, so you looked at data you produced charts. You did analysis relating to the data, but you had no reason at the time.
You did this to consider any particular statements. Isn't that true, that's true, i think that's an appropriate scientific methodology to not to first gather as much data as possible and then drill down on the data and the twitter data you collected shows that the four hashtags you would you identified were in existence before mr Waldman made the first statement: they didn't exist april 2020 right, that's correct, nope in very small number, but but justice for johnny depp has been around since 2013. Correct. All of them did um.

That sounds correct, yeah amber heard, isn't it in that case shouldn't you make bots to just say a bunch of about a bunch of people, so they that they exist ahead of time abuser and amber turd first appeared in 2016.. Correct, i don't recall, actually right. Do you recall if there was any portion of mr waldman's statement that made it any reference to amber turd, not that i've seen right people can form a negative view of misheard without reading mr waldman's statements, correct people can form a negative opinion of anyone without reading Anything that's correct and you didn't consider whether there was negative publicity around misheard other than the waldman statements. What i did was to report on uh correlation uh with with these hashtags and certain search terms.

In particular, i wasn't trying to read anyone's mind as to why they use them. You didn't form any opinion, that of of the million tweets million plus tweets that you looked at we're connected in some way to mr waldman's statements. I did eventually, yes, you didn't. You did eventually, after you read somebody else's report relative to testimony that hasn't been given here.

Well, i did it before my deposition. All right, you uh have a demonstrative that uh council played for you. Can we put up uh uh nice guys? I don't think he is, is he this is yours right, correct, um, the biggest spikes by far the biggest spikes here are attributable to what hashtag justice for johnny jeff hashtag yeah, and there are spikes that existed uh considerably and before mr wildman's statement, you were asked About that by council, one of them did. That was the date that mr waldman leaked uh, the audio tape the biggest spike was before.

This is the statement right the date he leaked the audio, and then there were many statements that um are there many hashtags or uses of the hashtag that follow the statements? You'll have to be more specific. Well, so you looked at a million two of these hashtags right right in your chart. Didn't 980 000 of these plus belong to justice for johnny depp. That sounds about right.

You'd have to show me, but i i'll take your word for it all right, but the vast majority of them were justice for johnny depp. A majority of them were well. It wasn't the majority so large that you had to draw another chart. Reason for drawing another chart is is because the numbers were high at particular points, so you wouldn't be able to see the other hashtags right literally.
This is your chart and and all of the other activity at the bottom. You can barely see. Oh no in comparison to the justice for johnny depp right as i testified, you can barely see them because of the spikes in the justice for johnny depp hashtag, but the. But when you look at the other chart, you can see that those others are still very large numbers, so you're not offering any opinion as to what caused these spikes.

That's correct right. So you're you're not a pining as to why these spikes are there. I'm only talking about correlation right, you're talking about well. This is how it should be, though, even though, even though he's an expert or whatever i don't, i don't think he's very biased.

I think he hired him to do. The stats he's explain the stats. So if you ask him a question and that is like incrementing for them or like or like it looks bad for them. Well he's answering, i mean i i agree with that.

I think that's. That's very good he's answering if it's a good question and it has a good answer, so be it the mathematical connection. That's right right! That's how law should be that's! Oh! That's all anybody and you don't purport to be in anybody's head such that. You know why they did uh a particular post with a particular hashtag.

That's correct, uh, there's a second spike that appears to be in july of 2020. um. Yes, the the pointer was pointing to a different one, but yes, yeah um were you where there was a trial in the in the uk in 2020, i'm aware, and in july um you're saying it was in july no, but we as of that the time of That spike there was ev. There was publicity around a trap, correct.

I don't know how much publicity there was. I i know the trial was going on. Then there are a number of things called out in your chart: um relative to particular dates. December 17th february, 11th february 14th.

You see all those i do bubbles and your chart makes absolutely no reference to and does not identify the dates of any of the waldman statements. Does it, sir? Not no, it doesn't call those out if that's what you're asking it calls out a whole bunch of other dates, but nothing relative to the waldman statements correct. Oh, it's coming all right at some time. At some point uh, you ran searches for additional search terms, uh hoax fraud.

I think you said fake and then you don't know why those terms appeared. Do you i'm not sure what you mean by that question? Are you asking me you could not perform a scientific analysis of the reason why these those terms appeared in that in the tweets you were looking at right. I could only show mathematical correlation right. You can show a correlation, but but you don't have any idea.
Why they're there i i can't get into people's heads right and just because the tweet contends one of the times this is lawyer, i'm not i'm not sure about them terms does not mean the tweet was in some way, prompted by mr waldman right, well, they're they're Doing something and then the the waldman and waldmanyeon okay, so um, you know it's not that big of a threat, this line of questioning uh. I i feel like these classical questions, can't really go anywhere, because the the the guy does the stats and put the stats in the computer. I i don't think he can draw any sort of uh to say that opinion, mr waldman, if it's his name and wild mignon or minion, wait a minute. Is it's the new standard? It's not that big a stretch.

Oh that's the point. I get it. Yes, i'm trying to speak right. Yes, all right, so you're, not suggesting that you know why mr waldman's name appeared in any of these tweets.

Well, if you look at, if you look at the tweets that have wild mignon, you know - and i looked at a large sample of them - just a large sample was uh 2 000 out of a million two. No, i looked at more than that of these, but um that's another thing that i wouldn't expect to be in controversy. Um. You know when people are saying that they're part of the wild minions or things like that um.

I would expect everybody to agree without arguing that it has to do with mr waldman do with mr waldman. I'm wondering how do you know that had anything to do with mr waldman's statement, but i was under the impression i was informed that nobody really knew who? Mr waldman was before all of this, so i wouldn't expect it to be anything else. I didn't think it was in controversy. It wasn't in controversy whether everyone knew who mr waldman was, that testimony.

No saying it wasn't in controversy that um that if somebody was suddenly talking about him that it had to do with this case, all right, but again it's not did it have to do with this case. It's did it have to do with the allegedly defamatory statements you have no idea. Do you, sir? I can't get into anyone's mind. I can only talk about the science of it right, um, and so you identify all of these uh hashtags as as as negative towards misheard.

Right right. Justice for johnny depp is not negative towards misheard. Is it no, but the tweets that use that hashtag are no, but the hashtag yourself wait, wait that doesn't make okay wait. Didn't he just kind of fail here? It's not.

He said he can't get into people's minds on why they do something here right and he won't do he's only going to go in the science of it. Then he said - and he says this isn't against her. He says that the tweets are: is it not making a conclusion or an opinion on what what these uh, what people meant by that negative towards misheard? Is it no, but the tweets not really that use that hashtag are no, but the hashtag itself, the the hashtag that predominates through your analysis is not in fact negative towards miss hurt, i'm not talking, i'm not opining on the hashtag itself. I'm talking about the tweets that contain that hashtag, but the hashtag itself is: you can evaluate the hashtag.
You can't evaluate the contents of the tweets themselves and their nature, otherwise it being a data somewhere or does it there'd be some sort of source for it, but he's just kind of saying that it's not negative. That's not part of my opinion. You can do you have an opinion as to whether justice for johnny depp is a good thing. That's not part of my assignment.

Okay, okay, but you'll, agree with me. Justice in general is a good thing. Big fan of justice me too. No further questions all right.

Redirect? Okay, yes, sir okay, what was that um? You, mr chanel, you reviewed um enough as a large sampling of tweets of justice for johnny depp correct i did and the tweet and the tweets that had the hashtag justice and here comes how many of them were negative toward misheard, all of them? What um, and what percentage of the tweets with negative hashtags between april 20, 20 and january 31st? 2021? Okay, that's a major heart rossi! How do i know, because that's nearly impossible with that, with that many people you're bound to have at least one troll you're about to have a reply. That is that that is in in johnny's favor, that is literally just uh, using the hashtag to get into a conversation. Literally when you see when you see a hashtag, as i don't know, bts forever stan luna. How many people are go and use the hashtag and say shut up dumb suckers, because a bunch of morons at at least one out of 100 thousands? I would assume.

So this doesn't make sense. And in your analysis, how far in times are the tweets containing the terms waldman or waldmignon, go like how, far to now beyond the scope across he was asking about overall um? So i think i disclosed at my deposition that i that i looked further into um 2022 and um found that it continued to go on, didn't see any end to it. How am i the bigger what i did? It makes a lot of sense. He agrees that the nature of the hashtag is for justice and not against her.

He testified that he agrees it's not against her and he said that in the hundreds of thousands of tweets, they were all against her in nature right. Therefore, the content of the tweet would have to say that it's all against her, but people use hashtags to get in conversations and on topics on twitter. Therefore, it is it is, it is by default impossible that every person they use the hashtag was all again. It's just impossible: oh okay, and based on your analysis again what period of time had more negative tweets against misheard before or after april 2020, it was clearly um double as many from april to 2021 and that's even including the february 2020 spike correct.
That's right! So that's sample is negative. Okay, then i'm going to cherry pick five data at random and say: oh guys, this is negative about amber checkmate. What the is that are you, okay, which is before april? Obviously, so, even if you put that in there, it's still a lot more smoking, the quebecois again, i see and there are fewer months in that time period. I think they're 20 or 15 15 months in that time, period and 27 months in the first part and based on your analysis.

What, if any end, do you see to the negative tweets toward mr objection, no foundation based on his analysis up until the time i'll sustain the objections? Okay, did you see any based on your analysis? Did you, at the end of the time of your of your analysis, what was happening with the negative tweets towards her to continue to go on? Okay, mr chanel, after your cross-examination? Have any of your opinions in this matter changed what no they have not. Thank you. All right all right, so you can have a seat in the courtroom where you're free to go. Okay, all right, your next witness, okay, sure what the was that give me! You.


By xQcOW

14 thoughts on “Johnny depp lawyer confronts twitter expert about #amberturd tweets xqc reacts”
  1. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars BunniMonster says:

    Amazing how many people are trashing the Cross here.
    It completely discredited the charts and the information the guy gave, as well as telling the jury what the global opinion is outside of the courtroom (Justice for Johnny) and "AmberTurd" is now permanently enshrined in court records. It was a great Cross.

  2. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars SoulThief says:

    I think the Lawyer really wanted to solidify that correlation does not lead to causation which is very common knowledge. Using statistics and reasoning you can define/justify certain causations without "reading peoples mind" but correlation is basically just statistics. You could say that the trend of cloth production and trend of birth rate are similar so they are correlated but you can't say that the increase in cloth production leads to an increase in birth. So even tho there's a correlation there is no causation. But honestly I don't know what the Lawyer was asking half the time.

  3. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Ethel says:

    Wayne Dennison (Depp's lawyer) is underrated. He's respectful, he has good questions, the way he say Amber Turd is iconic, and mic drop at the end is great. His cross didn't make much noise because he got the side characters. Camille crossed examined the antagonist that's why she had a good run, let's also acknowledge Ben Chew and other lawyers for helping Camille, if you notice Ben keeps passing notes to Camille while she was doing the cross examination

  4. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Eclipse Beatbox says:

    This witness was trash… and the cross examination wasn’t much better

  5. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Sus says:

    Criticism = mean to princess amber turd

    Even then its twitter your gonna get roasted there and amber pretty dug herself in this situation

  6. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Jerry From The Block says:

    rather than attacking factual statistics, depps lawyer used their questioning to oppose how the data is framed; as an opportunity to point out the broad public opinion/millions of supporters of depp. at the end they suggested that rather than interpreting it as a waldman coordinated smear campaign vs heard, people found out the truth and want justice for depp. clever strat

  7. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars GRIIMM says:

    I can't believe "Amber Turd" made it all the way to court lmao

  8. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars MoGaming says:

    wait so he gathered data on the hashtags but didnt gather the media's statements which would influence the public??
    edit: nvm it makes sense, the guy wasnt hired by any of them (i think?) jsut brought on to gather and explain the stats

  9. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars ayo says:

    yeah this lawyer was a little bit too much of a boomer to ask the right questions.
    This could have been big for Depp since this witness guy seems pretty unbiased

  10. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Strawberry BudZ says:

    Lmao when he said amber turd you can see the people in the back laughing

  11. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Thea says:

    The Hog Rider card is unlocked from the Spell Valley (Arena 5). He is a very fast building-targeting, melee troop with moderately high hitpoints and damage. He appears just like his Clash of Clans counterpart; a man with brown eyebrows, a beard, a mohawk, and a golden body piercing in his left ear who is riding a hog. A Hog Rider card costs 4 Elixir to deploy.

    Strategy

    His fast move speed can boost forward mini tanks like an Ice Golem in a push. At the same time, he can also function as a tank for lower hitpoint troops such as Goblins as he still has a fair amount of health. Most cheap swarms complement the Hog Rider well, as they are nearly as fast as him and usually force more than one card out of the opponent's hand.

    The Hog Rider struggles with swarms, as they can damage him down and defeat him quickly while obstructing his path. Barbarians in particular can fully counter him without very strict timing on the defender's part, though be wary of spells.

    A Hunter can kill the Hog Rider in 2 hits if placed right on top of it. However, if you place something in front of the Hog Rider, the Hunter's splash will damage the Hog Rider and hit the card in front of it more.

    The Hog Rider in conjunction with the Freeze can surprise the opponent and allow the Hog Rider to deal much more damage than anticipated, especially if the opponent's go-to counter is a swarm, or swarms are their only effective counter to him. Skeletons and Bats will immediately be defeated by the spell, while Spear Goblins, Goblins, and Minions will be at low enough health to be defeated by a follow up Zap or Giant Snowball.

    However, this strategy isn't very effective against buildings as the Hog Rider will take a while to destroy the building, giving the opponent ample time to articulate another counter.

    Against non-swarm troops, it can deal a lot of damage during the freeze time, but this can allow the opponent to set up a massive counterpush. For this reason, players should either only go for a Hog Rider + Freeze when they have other units backing it up from a counterattack, or if the match is about to end and they need to deal as much damage as possible.

    It is not a good idea to send in a Hog Rider simply to destroy a building, especially if it is the only building targeting unit available, as defeating Crown Towers becomes substantially more difficult. Spells or simply waiting out the lifetime of the building are more effective. The exception to this is an Elixir Collector placed in front of the King's Tower. If a Hog Rider placed at the bridge, he can destroy the Collector for a positive Elixir trade, though the damage from both Princess Towers will usually mean he does not survive to deal any damage to them. However, if the opponent sends in defending troops, it can be an opportunity to gain spell damage value.

    In a deck with several low-cost cards, it might be worth it to simply send the Hog Rider against one building. These decks shuffle their card rotation quick enough, that they will arrive to their next Hog Rider before the next building arrives in the opponent's card rotation.

    Long-ranged troops like Musketeer and Flying Machine can snipe those buildings, preserving some of the Hog Rider's health, possibly allowing it to get some Tower damage.

    When there are buildings placed in the middle to counter the Hog Rider, understanding the placement of the Hog Rider and the type of building placed can help the Hog Rider to bypass certain buildings.

    Passive buildings such as spawners and Elixir Collector have a larger hitbox than defensive buildings; which means that if a passive building was placed 3 tiles away from the river in the middle of the opponent's side, then it is impossible for the Hog Rider to bypass that placement as the Hog Rider will get pulled to that building.

    Defensive buildings have a smaller hitbox than a passive building, which means if that if a defensive building was placed three tiles away from the river in the middle of the opponent's side, a Hog Rider placed at the very left or right side of the Arena may be able to bypass it due to its smaller hitbox.

    If the player has a building already placed down in the center of the arena, and the opponent tries to bypass it with a Hog Rider at the edge of the arena, they can use certain air troops to push the Hog Rider towards the building as it jumps over the river, effectively denying the bypass attempt. They must be already hovering over the correct placement, as very quick reflexes are required to correctly perform this technique.

    For Bats, Skeleton Dragons, and Minion Horde, they should be placed right in front of the Hog Rider as soon as it is deployed.

    For Minions, Skeleton Barrel, Mega Minion, Flying Machine, Electro Dragon, Baby Dragon, Inferno Dragon, Balloon, and Lava Hound, stagger the above placement one tile to the right if the Hog Rider is placed on the left side of the arena, and vice versa.

    They can also use ground troops to achieve the same result. Something like an Ice Golem deployed at the Hog Rider’s landing spot will obstruct his path and force him to go around the unit, which causes him to be closer to the building instead of the Crown Tower.

    The Hog Rider can kite Very Fast non-building targeting troops due to his own Very Fast speed and building only targeting if he is placed on the fourth tile from the bridge, slightly into the opposite lane. He can also stall grounded units when placed right at the bridge. He will pull them towards him while deploying, and then be untargetable by them when he jumps over the bridge. After landing, he will pull them back. This can be useful when the player needs to deal damage in the same lane they are defending. It will also help separate troops behind a tank in a large push.

    A Tornado placed on the second tile front of the player's King's Tower and staggered two tiles towards the Princess Tower will activate it without any damage dealt to the Princess Tower, helping them in defending future pushes. This can also be a method of mitigating all damage dealt to a Princess Tower, but doing this more than three times may result in the King's Tower's health being low enough to be targeted directly, opening up the possible threat of a back door three crown. A better alternative is to pull the Hog away from the Princess Tower into the attacking range of all three Crown Towers, which will negate all damage as long as none of them are already distracted

    A very powerful combo is the Hog Rider, the Musketeer, and the Valkyrie, typically referred to as the Trifecta. The Musketeer will defend against most troops, while the Valkyrie can protect her and the Hog Rider from swarms or high damage units. The Hog Rider is used to deal damage to the tower.

    This can be effectively countered by Lightning, one-shotting the Musketeer and severely damaging both the Valkyrie and Hog Rider. The Minion Horde is also effective, but the enemy can Zap them and the Musketeer will one-shot them all. Even if the Musketeer is defeated, the Hog Rider and Valkyrie will have enough time to severely damage the Tower.

    The Hog Rider should be placed behind the Valkyrie to give it a boost so that it stays in front of the Hog Rider, protecting it.

    A Hog Rider combined with a Goblin Barrel can be awkward for the opponent to defend against. Timing it so that the Hog Rider is tanking the tower shots for the Goblins is the most effective way to deal damage. However, a Barbarian Barrel can shut this down with minimal Tower damage for a positive Elixir trade, as long as the Goblin Barrel was placed directly on the Tower.

    Pairing the Hog Rider with the Balloon can deal devastating damage. If executed properly, the Hog Rider will act as a tank while the Balloon threatens to deal massive damage. The Hog Rider can also destroy any buildings attempting to slow down the combo. However, this combo is very vulnerable to swarms and anti-air cards as neither of the troops target anything but buildings. Additionally, they are easy to separate, due to the disparity in move speeds. Alternatively, the Hog Rider and the Balloon can be played in different lanes to spread the opponent's defenses thin. However, a building or Tornado can bring them back together for an easier defense.

    The Hog Rider can be paired with the Lumberjack as both a swarm bait and damage combo. It is a very fast combo with an extremely high damage output potential, so the enemy will likely try to counter it with a swarm. If this happens, use a spell like Arrows to render the opponent defenseless. If they manage to defeat the Lumberjack, the dropped Rage will make the Hog Rider even more dangerous than it normally is.

    A fast and deadly combination is the Hog Rider and Mini P.E.K.K.A. combo. Both units are fast but the Mini P.E.K.K.A. does much more damage and does not attack only buildings so the Mini P.E.K.K.A. can deal with troops like the Executioner and Musketeer. However, this combo can be defeated with swarms like Skeleton Army, which will defeat both of them since neither of them can deal area damage. They are also unable to target air troops, so the Minion Horde can stop this easily.

    A risky play is to deploy the Hog Rider at the bridge as soon as the match starts. If the opponent does not react fast enough, the Hog Rider will deal a significant amount of damage to the Princess Tower. This can also allow the player to quickly scout the opponent's deck if they happen to react to him fast enough.

    Also I'm a femboy.

  12. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Shinobi says:

    Johnny Depp been in over 90 Movies
    Amber Heard: Aquaman 😂

  13. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Genix says:

    Bro she is a monster how did you get 7mil and promise to make that donation to sick children then lie about it saying you did, but your excuse was that JD sued you which prevented you to make that "donation" but you had 13 months to make that dono within that time frame???

  14. Avataaar/Circle Created with python_avatars Russian Waifu says:

    The only thing funnier than this whole trial is Amber Heard's acting career.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.