Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 03:56 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

Jim Killion, Counsel for Susan Polgar, has today filed a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas to
quash subpoenas served by the USCF's Texas Counsel on the USCF's San
Francisco Counsel.

Last week I reported that the USCF's Texas Counsel has subpoenaed the
subpoenas of the USCF's San Francisco Counsel.

Many readers thought that I was making a joke, but I was not joking.

The basis on the motion was that originally the USCF's San Francisco
Counsel had filed a case in California State Court entitled USCF vs
Does 1-10 and then had served subpoenas on various Internet Service
Providers used by Susan Polgar including Ameica Online and Comcast
Cable Communications.

Susan Polgar's San Francisco Attorney Whitner Leigh then moved to
remove the case to federal court which by that time had been renamed
USCF vs. Susan Polgar and Gergory Alexander. Susan Polgar's San
Francisco Counsel, Gay & Lesbian Civil Rights Lawyer Matt Gonzalez,
then moved to quash the subpoenas on the cround that they did not
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedure.

However, by that time, some of the subpoenas had already been complied
with and had revealed the smoking gun, so Susan's Gay and Lesbian
Lawyer moved for a protective order saying that the results of the
subpoenas not be disclosed.

This explains why the USCF;'s lawyer, Hirsch & Westheimer, in Houston,
Texas, would subpoena the USCF's San Francisco lawyer, Karl
Kronenberger. Because of the protective order, Karl Kronenberger
cannot otherwise give the documents to Karl Kronenberger.

I personally believe that Susan's motion will be denied. Now that the
Smoking Gun is out there, it is inevitable that these documents will
become publicly available.

Meanwhile, Susan's San Francisco lawyer has filed two motions, one to
dismiss the case entirely and the other to transfer the case to the
Northern District of Texas. I believe that the second motion will be
granted. Susan's San Francisco lawyer makes a persuasive argument that
Texas is a better forum state than California. Judge Patel in San
Francisco has stayed discovery until there can be a hearing on these
motions. This plus her comments during the last hearing lead me to
conclude that Judge Patel is leaning towards a transfer of the case to
Texas.

What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this.

Sam Sloan
  #2   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 04:08 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

On Mar 12, 11:56*pm, samsloan wrote:
Jim Killion, Counsel for Susan Polgar, has today filed a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas to
quash subpoenas served by the USCF's Texas Counsel on the USCF's San
Francisco Counsel.

Last week I reported that the USCF's Texas Counsel has subpoenaed the
subpoenas of the USCF's San Francisco Counsel.

Many readers thought that I was making a joke, but I was not joking.

The basis on the motion was that originally the USCF's San Francisco
Counsel had filed a case in California State Court entitled USCF vs
Does 1-10 and then had served subpoenas on various Internet Service
Providers used by Susan Polgar including Ameica Online and Comcast
Cable Communications.

Susan Polgar's San Francisco Attorney Whitner Leigh then moved to
remove the case to federal court which by that time had been renamed
USCF vs. Susan Polgar and Gergory Alexander. Susan Polgar's San
Francisco Counsel, Gay & Lesbian Civil Rights Lawyer Matt Gonzalez,
then moved to quash the subpoenas on the cround that they did not
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedure.

However, by that time, some of the subpoenas had already been complied
with and had revealed the smoking gun, so Susan's Gay and Lesbian
Lawyer moved for a protective order saying that the results of the
subpoenas not be disclosed.

This explains why the USCF;'s lawyer, Hirsch & Westheimer, in Houston,
Texas, would subpoena the USCF's San Francisco lawyer, Karl
Kronenberger. Because of the protective order, Karl Kronenberger
cannot otherwise give the documents to Karl Kronenberger.

I personally believe that Susan's motion will be denied. Now that the
Smoking Gun is out there, it is inevitable that these documents will
become publicly available.

Meanwhile, Susan's San Francisco lawyer has filed two motions, one to
dismiss the case entirely and the other to transfer the case to the
Northern District of Texas. I believe that the second motion will be
granted. Susan's San Francisco lawyer makes a persuasive argument that
Texas is a better forum state than California. Judge Patel in San
Francisco has stayed discovery until there can be a hearing on these
motions. This plus her comments during the last hearing lead me to
conclude that Judge Patel is leaning towards a transfer of the case to
Texas.

What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this.

Sam Sloan


"What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this". --Sam Sloan

Donny the weasel? Hugo Chavez? Taylor Kingston?



  #3   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 09:43 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 365
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

None wrote:
On Mar 12, 11:56 pm, samsloan wrote:
Jim Killion, Counsel for Susan Polgar, has today filed a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas to
quash subpoenas served by the USCF's Texas Counsel on the USCF's San
Francisco Counsel.

Last week I reported that the USCF's Texas Counsel has subpoenaed the
subpoenas of the USCF's San Francisco Counsel.

Many readers thought that I was making a joke, but I was not joking.

The basis on the motion was that originally the USCF's San Francisco
Counsel had filed a case in California State Court entitled USCF vs
Does 1-10 and then had served subpoenas on various Internet Service
Providers used by Susan Polgar including Ameica Online and Comcast
Cable Communications.

Susan Polgar's San Francisco Attorney Whitner Leigh then moved to
remove the case to federal court which by that time had been renamed
USCF vs. Susan Polgar and Gergory Alexander. Susan Polgar's San
Francisco Counsel, Gay & Lesbian Civil Rights Lawyer Matt Gonzalez,
then moved to quash the subpoenas on the cround that they did not
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Proceedure.

However, by that time, some of the subpoenas had already been complied
with and had revealed the smoking gun, so Susan's Gay and Lesbian
Lawyer moved for a protective order saying that the results of the
subpoenas not be disclosed.

This explains why the USCF;'s lawyer, Hirsch & Westheimer, in Houston,
Texas, would subpoena the USCF's San Francisco lawyer, Karl
Kronenberger. Because of the protective order, Karl Kronenberger
cannot otherwise give the documents to Karl Kronenberger.

I personally believe that Susan's motion will be denied. Now that the
Smoking Gun is out there, it is inevitable that these documents will
become publicly available.

Meanwhile, Susan's San Francisco lawyer has filed two motions, one to
dismiss the case entirely and the other to transfer the case to the
Northern District of Texas. I believe that the second motion will be
granted. Susan's San Francisco lawyer makes a persuasive argument that
Texas is a better forum state than California. Judge Patel in San
Francisco has stayed discovery until there can be a hearing on these
motions. This plus her comments during the last hearing lead me to
conclude that Judge Patel is leaning towards a transfer of the case to
Texas.

What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this.

Sam Sloan


"What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this". --Sam Sloan

Donny the weasel? Hugo Chavez? Taylor Kingston?



Polgar's position was that she didn't do it, so she had no objection to
subpoenas until they came up with evidence that she did it. Now she
objects to the subpoenas. You can't stop a party from gathering
evidence of your wrongdoing from third parties via subpoena. At some
point one has to think there will be a rather annoyed judge somewhere in
Texas.
  #4   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 11:02 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

Jim Killion, Counsel for Susan Polgar, has today filed a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas to
quash subpoenas served by the USCF's Texas Counsel on the USCF's San
Francisco Counsel.

Last week I reported that the USCF's Texas Counsel had subpoenaed the
subpoenas on the USCF's San Francisco Counsel.

Many readers thought that I was making a joke, but I was not joking.

The basis for the motion was that originally the USCF's San Francisco
Counsel had filed a case in California State Court entitled USCF vs
Does 1-10 and then had served subpoenas on various Internet Service
Providers used by Susan Polgar including America Online and Comcast
Cable Communications.

Susan Polgar's San Francisco Attorney Whitney Leigh then moved to
remove the case to federal court which by that time had been renamed
USCF vs. Susan Polgar and Gregory Alexander. Susan Polgar's San
Francisco Counsel, Gay & Lesbian Civil Rights Lawyer Matt Gonzalez,
then moved to quash the subpoenas on the ground that they did not
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

However, by that time, some of the subpoenas had already been complied
with and had revealed the smoking gun, so Susan's Gay and Lesbian
Lawyer moved for a protective order saying that the results of the
subpoenas not be disclosed.

This explains why the USCF's lawyer, Hirsch & Westheimer, in Houston,
Texas, would subpoena the USCF's San Francisco lawyer, Karl
Kronenberger. Because of the protective order, Karl Kronenberger
cannot otherwise give the documents to Hirsch & Westheimer.

I personally believe that Susan's motion will be denied. Now that the
Smoking Gun is out there, it is inevitable that these documents will
become publicly available.

Meanwhile, Susan's San Francisco lawyer has filed two motions, one to
dismiss the case entirely and the other to transfer the case to the
Northern District of Texas. I believe that the second motion will be
granted. Susan's San Francisco lawyer makes a persuasive argument that
Texas is a better forum state than California. Judge Patel in San
Francisco has stayed discovery until there can be a hearing on these
motions. This plus her comments during the last hearing lead me to
conclude that Judge Patel is leaning towards a transfer of the case to
Texas.

What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this.

Sam Sloan
  #5   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 11:13 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 365
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

samsloan wrote:
Jim Killion, Counsel for Susan Polgar, has today filed a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas to
quash subpoenas served by the USCF's Texas Counsel on the USCF's San
Francisco Counsel.

Last week I reported that the USCF's Texas Counsel had subpoenaed the
subpoenas on the USCF's San Francisco Counsel.

Many readers thought that I was making a joke, but I was not joking.

The basis for the motion was that originally the USCF's San Francisco
Counsel had filed a case in California State Court entitled USCF vs
Does 1-10 and then had served subpoenas on various Internet Service
Providers used by Susan Polgar including America Online and Comcast
Cable Communications.

Susan Polgar's San Francisco Attorney Whitney Leigh then moved to
remove the case to federal court which by that time had been renamed
USCF vs. Susan Polgar and Gregory Alexander. Susan Polgar's San
Francisco Counsel, Gay & Lesbian Civil Rights Lawyer Matt Gonzalez,
then moved to quash the subpoenas on the ground that they did not
comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

However, by that time, some of the subpoenas had already been complied
with and had revealed the smoking gun, so Susan's Gay and Lesbian
Lawyer moved for a protective order saying that the results of the
subpoenas not be disclosed.

This explains why the USCF's lawyer, Hirsch & Westheimer, in Houston,
Texas, would subpoena the USCF's San Francisco lawyer, Karl
Kronenberger. Because of the protective order, Karl Kronenberger
cannot otherwise give the documents to Hirsch & Westheimer.

I personally believe that Susan's motion will be denied. Now that the
Smoking Gun is out there, it is inevitable that these documents will
become publicly available.

Meanwhile, Susan's San Francisco lawyer has filed two motions, one to
dismiss the case entirely and the other to transfer the case to the
Northern District of Texas. I believe that the second motion will be
granted. Susan's San Francisco lawyer makes a persuasive argument that
Texas is a better forum state than California. Judge Patel in San
Francisco has stayed discovery until there can be a hearing on these
motions. This plus her comments during the last hearing lead me to
conclude that Judge Patel is leaning towards a transfer of the case to
Texas.

What is especially noteworthy is that these three motions and their
attached exhibits comprise hundreds of pages and obviously cost tens
of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I wonder who is paying for all
this.

Sam Sloan


Polgar has a "supporter" who is footing all of her legal fees in all of
her cases. The name of this person will come out eventually via
discovery. Should be most interesting.


  #6   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 11:49 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Eric Schiller
wrote:
Sam insists on characterizing Progressive Green politician Matt Gonzales as
a GLBTQIO rights attorney but he is known as a champion of many causes. He
is enormously popular in SF but in court has no advantage. He is a familiar
face but has backed the losing side many times. Here he is just doing his
job, as we should want him to do.

Eric


Eric Schiller has taught me something. (Thank you, Eric)

Turns out that GLBTQIO means "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender,
Questioning, Intersexed and Other".

There are a lot of those in San Francisco and it turns out that Matt
Gonzalez, Susan Polgar's Lawyer, seems to be one of them.

I was having a conversation two days ago with a friend in San
Francisco who is not a chess player and who knows nothing about Chess
Politics and he happened to start talking about Matt Gonzalez, with
whom he has had dealings. He said that Matt Gonzalez is gay and is
involved in all the Gay Rights cases out there.

He also told me that Matt Gonzalez is a "terrible lawyer" and "the
worst lawyer" and that I have nothing to worry about if Matt Gonzalez
is suing me.

I have no idea and express no opinion as to whether my friend is right
or not, but I just did a quick internet search on Matt Gonzalez and
found that almost every article about him in the San Francisco
newspapers refers in some way to his sexuality or his sexual affairs.
I have yet to find any mention of his prowess as a lawyer or even to
the fact that he is a lawyer.

The Susan Polgar Litigation in which he represents Susan Polgar seems
to be handled primarily by his partner, Whitney Leigh. I believe that
Mr. Leigh is losing most of the motions but I think that his current
motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of Texas will be
granted.

Sam Sloan
  #7   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 12:42 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 23
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco


"samsloan" wrote in message
...

I was having a conversation two days ago with a friend in San
Francisco who is not a chess player and who knows nothing about Chess
Politics and he happened to start talking about Matt Gonzalez, with
whom he has had dealings. He said that Matt Gonzalez is gay and is
involved in all the Gay Rights cases out there.


That's a remarkable coincidence. You just happened to be talking to someone
in SF, and they just happened to mention Susan Polgar's lawyer, the same
Susan Polgar with whom you are completely obsessed and who you spend hours
every day fantasizing about on the internets. What. are. the. odds.



He also told me that Matt Gonzalez is a "terrible lawyer" and "the
worst lawyer" and that I have nothing to worry about if Matt Gonzalez
is suing me.


Well, but you're allegedly judgment proof, aren't you? Clarence Darrow and
Daniel Webster could jointly and severally shove writs of scire facias up
your ass till the cows come home, it wouldn't do any good.


I have no idea and express no opinion as to whether my friend is right
or not, but I just did a quick internet search on Matt Gonzalez and
found that almost every article about him in the San Francisco
newspapers refers in some way to his sexuality or his sexual affairs.
I have yet to find any mention of his prowess as a lawyer or even to
the fact that he is a lawyer.


That's interesting. So intereresting in fact that I did a Nexis search of SF
newspapers over the past three months to see whether you were completely
lying out your ****ing ass. And guess what? You are. The very first article
retrieved, from just two weeks ago (February 27, 2009 Friday FINAL Edition),
from the SF Chronicle, a feature article about Matt Gonzalez, entitled
"Lawyer, artist, and don't forget the politics; Catching up with ... Matt
Gonzalez." So as you can see, it mentions that he's a lawyer (and an artist
and Ralph Nader's running mate). It does not mention whether he is gay -- or
even whether he might be a scumbag child molester and penniless ex con who
sucked lifer dick in prison for cigarettes. Prior to that there's a bunch of
articles from the Chronicle about local politics -- the mayors race, the
supervisors race -- all of which mention that he's a lawyer and none of
which mention that he's gay.

Then I did a search for "Matt Gonzalez w/25 gay" over the same period, which
returned 15 articles. Each one of those articles dealt with the gay marriage
issue, none with anyone's private sexual concerns.

Then I "did a quick internet search" by googling Matt Gonzalez's name. The
word gay does not appear anywhere in the first three articles listed. Each
mentions he is a lawyer. I would have looked read a couple more, but really,
what would have been the point.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...ez&btnG=Search

Finally, I googled Matt Gonzalez + gay. Again, I looked at the first three
articles. Each was retrieved because "gay marriage" appeared. None mentioned
Gonzalez's sexual appetites.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&btnG=Sea rch


It's rare that politicians tell the truth; and they never keep their
campaign promises. Consider: if you were to make promising not to tell the
truth part of your USCF election platform, by continuing to lie out your ass
at every opportunity you would both be keeping your campaign pledges and
giving anyone stupid enough to vote for you exactly what they deserve.



Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar
Susan Polgar


You don't say.


  #8   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 02:14 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 365
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

samsloan wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 12:42 AM, Eric Schiller
wrote:
Sam insists on characterizing Progressive Green politician Matt Gonzales as
a GLBTQIO rights attorney but he is known as a champion of many causes. He
is enormously popular in SF but in court has no advantage. He is a familiar
face but has backed the losing side many times. Here he is just doing his
job, as we should want him to do.

Eric


Eric Schiller has taught me something. (Thank you, Eric)

Turns out that GLBTQIO means "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender,
Questioning, Intersexed and Other".

There are a lot of those in San Francisco and it turns out that Matt
Gonzalez, Susan Polgar's Lawyer, seems to be one of them.

I was having a conversation two days ago with a friend in San
Francisco who is not a chess player and who knows nothing about Chess
Politics and he happened to start talking about Matt Gonzalez, with
whom he has had dealings. He said that Matt Gonzalez is gay and is
involved in all the Gay Rights cases out there.

He also told me that Matt Gonzalez is a "terrible lawyer" and "the
worst lawyer" and that I have nothing to worry about if Matt Gonzalez
is suing me.

I have no idea and express no opinion as to whether my friend is right
or not, but I just did a quick internet search on Matt Gonzalez and
found that almost every article about him in the San Francisco
newspapers refers in some way to his sexuality or his sexual affairs.
I have yet to find any mention of his prowess as a lawyer or even to
the fact that he is a lawyer.

The Susan Polgar Litigation in which he represents Susan Polgar seems
to be handled primarily by his partner, Whitney Leigh. I believe that
Mr. Leigh is losing most of the motions but I think that his current
motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of Texas will be
granted.

Sam Sloan


Sam, the sexual orientation of Matt Gonzalez is irrelevant and you are a
toad for raising it. As to his lawyering ability, both he and his
partner have excellent reputations as litigators and as criminal defense
attorneys.

Brian Lafferty
  #9   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 02:19 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 270
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

On Mar 13, 7:13*am, "Mr.Vidmar" wrote:


Polgar has a "supporter" who is footing all of her legal fees in all of
her cases. *The name of this person will come out eventually via
discovery. Should be most interesting.


Does the supporter live in Moscow?

  #10   Report Post  
Old March 13th 09, 02:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Polgar Moves in Texas to Quash Subpoenas in San Francisco

You are correct that no article, or at least none that I have found,
states that Matt Gonzalez is Gay.

However, take another look at the articles. They talk about whom he is
dating, whether he kissed a girl or not, whether his girlfriend is a
girl or not, whether he cries or not. He defends himself for crying by
saying that he is a "real man" even though he cries. It is mentioned
in the news that he is "a bachelor" and that "the girls love him".

Can you think of any other lawyer about whom there is such interest in
his private life? Only a movie star or somebody like Michael Jackson
has so much attention paid to his love affairs, dating, etc.

By the way, Michael Jackson is a good example because no article that
I am aware of has ever stated that Michael Jackson is gay, but it is
widely believed that he is.

Sam

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bogner Motion to Strike B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 December 27th 08 04:59 PM
Bogner Response B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 0 December 27th 08 04:52 PM
Bogner Response B. Lafferty[_6_] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 December 27th 08 04:52 PM
STATEMENT REGARDING USCF’S LEGAL SERVICE OF SUSAN POLGAR IN FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, ON OCTOBER 24, 2008 samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 November 18th 08 02:50 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017