Investigative Reporting a Positive Force for Change in Racing Industry

by | 12.11.2013 | 4:15pm

The following was presented by Ray Paulick at the 40th annual Global Symposium on Racing & Gaming in Tucson, Ariz., during a panel entitled “Muckraking Journalism as a Positive Force – the Second Annual Presentation of the Stan Bergstein Writing Award.”

Anyone who's watched 60 Minutes over the years understands the power of investigative reporting. If you were involved in some kind of scam, some wrongdoing, the last person you wanted to see walking into your business was Mike Wallace with a camera crew.

But 60 Minutes doesn't have a monopoly on this type of journalism. Back in 1978, when I was an editorial assistant at the Field Newspaper Syndicate in Chicago, which was then part of the Sun-Times and Daily News family, the Sun-Times pulled off one of the great undercover sting operations of all time.

Here's what happened.

There was an enterprising reporter named Pam Zekman, who had previously worked across the street from the Sun-Times at the Chicago Tribune. While she was a reporter at the Trib, she heard from a lot of sources who ran small businesses – mostly bars and restaurants – about corruption by government workers.

Imagine that. Corruption in Chicago.

The problem is, whenever Pam pushed her sources to name names, they pulled back, fearful of retribution from these government workers who could put them out of business. So she went to her bosses at the Tribune and said, “I want to buy a bar and find out, first hand, how deep this corruption runs.”

The Tribune, a conservative paper, didn't want go to there.

So Pam quit the Trib and moved over to the Sun-Times, where she made the same pitch. Jim Hoge, the Sun-Times chief editor, liked the idea. So, working in conjunction with a watchdog organization called the Better Government Association, the Sun-Times actually went out and bought a bar. It was run down and seedy. There were exposed electrical wires, bad plumbing, a colony of roaches and rats in the basement. To get licensed and to operate, the bar had to get approval from a long list of city and state inspectors.

They did some remodeling to this place, which they named the Mirage Tavern. Behind the bar, for example, they built a hideaway with a small hole in the wall, allowing a Sun-Times photographer the opportunity to take pictures of anything that went on inside. But they left all of the problems in place that city and state inspectors should have required be fixed.

Pam and some other Sun-Times reporters, along with members of the Better Government Association, found out very quickly that “business by bribe” was common practice in Chicago. With the help of a man who introduced himself to them as “Mr. Fixit,” they learned that envelopes with as little as $10 a week could convince fire, plumbing and building inspectors, along with liquor and food license officials, to look the other way.

It was all documented in a 25-part series that absolutely gripped Chicago during the winter of 1978.

The Mirage Tavern investigative series sold a lot of papers and it nearly won the paper a Pulitzer Prize – that honor was taken away over concerns that the reporters entrapped the corrupt government officials, something that Jim Hoge, the editor who oversaw the project, vehemently denied 35 years later, saying that lawyers gave very specific advice to the reporters on how to avoid entrapping suspects. “I don't think the reporting ever crossed that ethical line,” he told a reporter earlier this year.

“I think the Sun-Times, its editors and reporters who were involved, ought to be forever proud of the Mirage project,” Hoge said.

The bottom line wasn't selling papers or winning awards. It was changing a corrupt way of doing business.

This series led to significant changes in Chicago, the state of Illinois and throughout the country, since 60 Minutes also focused on the Mirage Tavern. People were suspended, fired, or indicted. Oversight was revised. The state tax bureau even set up something it called the “Mirage Audit Unit” to catch cash-based businesses that were cheating on taxes.

Those of us familiar with Illinois politics, however, know it didn't end corruption. Four of the last seven Illinois governors have gone to jail.

Can you imagine setting up a similar sting in horse racing? Would the Mirage Racing Stable be able to bust some of the people peddling performance-enhancing substances on our backstretches. Or would the Mirage Bloodstock Agency catch trainers demanding kickbacks on horses they buy for their clients?

Let's look at horse racing and some actual events that changed the way the business operates.

In 1999, there was a horse called Behrens, who came into the Breeders' Cup Classic as the favorite after four wins and four seconds in eight starts. The previous year he didn't win a single race. The late 1990s was – for horse racing – the equivalent of the steroids era in baseball. Except in horse racing it was milkshakes, a proven way of enhancing performance, and there was no testing being done to see if trainers were manipulating total carbon dioxide levels of horses. The higher the TCO2 level, the less amount of fatigue a horse would feel. This was going on at the time, and it was not isolated to a few trainers.

Behrens was stabled 90 minutes north of Gulfstream Park, where the 1999 Breeders' Cup was held, and his trainer, Jim Bond, had the luxury of shipping him in on the afternoon of the event.

Another trainer, Michael Dickinson, had a longshot in the Classic, but he didn't like the fact that the Breeders' Cup Classic favorite was under no surveillance or security up until a few hours before the race. On his own, Dickinson hired a couple of private investigators to do what Breeders' Cup was not doing: watch over the horses. The first private investigator monitored every move Behrens made at Payson Park that morning until it was time to get on the horse van for Gulfstream. He followed the van closely to the track – too closely said trainer Bond, who would later say the private eye tried to run the horse van off the road. The second investigator, holding a video camera, stood near the Gulfstream Park stall of another horse in the Classic.

This wasn't investigative reporting. Truth is, in 1999, no racing reporters – myself included – seemed the least bit concerned that there might be cheating going on. So Dickinson took things into his own hands.

Behrens finished seventh in the Classic, by far his worst race of the year, though we have no way of knowing if it was because his previous performances may have been enhanced. Dickinson's horse, incidentally, finished last.

The most important thing to come out of this was the fact that the Breeders' Cup adopted new rules the following year requiring horses to be on the grounds at least 24 hours before their race. That requirement has since been extended to 72 hours and Breeders' Cup security is now the gold standard for American racing.

Again, the end result of this was changing how business was conducted.

Let's fast forward to 2012 and the controversial series in the New York Times: Death and Disarray at America's Racetracks, written by racing writer Joe Drape and Walt Bogdanich, a former 60 Minutes producer who'd won three Pulitzer Prizes. Drape had done some reporting on medication issues, and really I think deserves credit for being the first horse racing writer to begin seriously examining some of the industry's problems involving doping.

Bogdanich called Drape's previous work “sniper shots” and said, “We need an atomic bomb.” He helped do the architecture on how to gather and compile the data that went into that series.

When the first part was published in March of last year, the initial reaction was “how dare they?” There were knee-jerk stories in trade publications trying to pick apart some of the numbers compiled for the series, but when you start arguing whether it's 24 horses a week that are dying at our racetracks or it's 15 or 18 or 20, you're not going to win the argument.

The front-page series touched a nerve, and not just with people who considered themselves racing fans. It injected into the mainstream consciousness of America some of the wrongdoing within our industry. And for change to happen, you have to first make the public aware.

What happened next was reform. In New Mexico, which got much of the focus of part one of the series, there was a shake-up at the racing commission. Tougher rules were adopted. The state legislature authorized more money be spent on security and drug testing.

Make no mistake: there was a serious problem. Let me remind you that in May 2012, just two months after the story ran, Ruidoso Downs in New Mexico held futurity trials. Of the 25 races run, eight of the winners – eight of them – tested positive for dermorphin, also known as frog juice, one of the most dangerous drugs you can give a horse. That is an epidemic of cheating.

The trainers that were nailed got stiff penalties. One was suspended 21 years. Another, AQHA champion trainer John Bassett, got 10 years. This would not have happened were it not for the New York Times.

In New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo had already called for a Task Force to look into why so many horses were dying at Aqueduct in the winter of 2012. In the light of the New York Times articles, that Task Force could not afford to brush details under the rug. Its report later that year was stunning and revealing in its detailing on how pervasive so-called therapeutic medications had become. New York regulators heeded the call to tighten restrictions on these drugs, and now the rest of the mid-Atlantic and much of the rest of the country are getting on board. As NYRA CEO Chris Kay said yesterday, the number of horse fatalities at NYRA tracks has declined dramatically.

That is the positive force of investigative journalism.

We are seeing federal indictments in Pennsylvania, where trainers were led out in handcuffs. The legislature there may disband the racing commission entirely and form a new regulatory body. I am getting reports of an investigation being conducted by the criminal division of the Food and Drug Administration and local authorities at a Midwestern harness track that involve wiretaps, illegal drugging, and a betting ring. Florida's Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering is under the microscope by state politicians. This is all happening in the wake of critical, investigative reporting.

I don't think I can emphasize this enough. The reason for this reporting is to change the culture when it needs change.

Sometimes you don't know if reporting on an issue has made a difference. Let's look at the Bob Baffert situation in California. From November 2011 until March 2013, at least seven horses in his barn at Hollywood Park died from some internal issue – not a broken leg but heart attacks, internal hemorrhage, whatever. Three publications that became aware of these extraordinary numbers – the New York Times, Blood-Horse, and Paulick Report – filed open records requests, examining necropsy reports of deaths, and all three publications published a story on April 10 of this year, coinciding with a California Horse Racing Board meeting where sudden deaths were discussed. Since those reports were published, Baffert hasn't lost a single horse to sudden death. Seven deaths in 16 months before stories were published. Zero deaths in the eight months since then.

Is that a coincidence? I don't think we'll ever know. But I do think, without the pressure from the media, the CHRB – which in April was denying that a problem existed – would not have conducted as thorough an investigation as it did.

Those of us who do this aren't in it to cause trouble or win awards or make friends in the industry. We are trying to make change.

  • Kirk S.

    The one common element you’ve described as being effective in creating change for the greater good is this: It has to be a media outlet outside of the subject.

    I agree investigative journalism can do a lot of good while exposing the ills of its subject matter. That means publications like the Daily Racing Form, BloodHorse or even the Paulick Report are not in the objective position to do any good. All of “you” have far too much to lose if you decided to do a hard as nails investigative piece. From losing access to sources on the backside to losing advertising revenues, it seems like there would be too much blowback to be worth it. To paraphrase a saying, “It’s not a good idea to sh*t where you eat.”

    If the Los Angeles or New York Times had been the one dogging the CHRB about Bob Baffert and the deaths in his barns, do you think the report would have taken as long? Do you think there would be so many unanswered questions at this date?

    If you want investigative journalism to be an aid in creating positive change, they have to get interested in the subject. Right now I don’t think the powers that be at “60 Minutes”, “Sports Illustrated” or any other major outlet really care about horse racing, let alone what might be going on in the barns.

    • Barry Irwin

      We how how effectively the LA Times handled Mr. Baffert in the column by Bill Dwyre. I disagree with your point.

      • azeri1

        Mr. Irwin I truly respect your business, the way you care for your horses, and most exceptionally, your support of banning Lasix and other race day drugs for all racehorses.However I disagree about the effectiveness of the LA Times article. Bill Dwyre didn’t even clip a hangnail in his piece entitled “Horse Racing Has Problems, But Bob Baffert Isn’t One Of Them”.
        He introduced a compilation of controversial incidents and then never defined their relationship to each other. He drew no solid conclusion and didn’t define his overall POV. Including Mr, Stronach’s support of WHOA as a controversial aspect of racing because there is no agreement on banning Lasix in the same laundry list as the charges brought against the two trainers and a clocker at Penn seemed to be logically incongruous.

        To be fair, perhaps he wasn’t allowed enough space for the incidents he wanted to discuss, so instead of thoroughly exploring one, he generalized and compared many. The overall effect was dissatisfying and served to diminish the primary point I believe he was trying to make. He wants the sport to move on. Move on it will because as in politics, no matter how much controversy ensues, the business continues. Not much of an argument in the end now, was it?

        • Barry Irwin

          Bill Dwyre’s puff piece at the very least was inspired by Baffert’s crisis management PR firm and is totally laughable to people that follow racing. My favorite quote applies here: Who’s kidding who?

        • Knowitall

          Aside from you missing Barry’s sarcasm, the point to Dwyer’s puff piece for Bob was to say that the sport has many on going controversies, which he enumerated, and that since Bob has been “cleared”, he should be deleted from that list, thank you very much…as he far too big for the game for anyone to mess with, i.e. he provides more upside with his witty one liners and camera winning personality, and hey, the horses have stopped dropping.

          • azeri1

            Yes I did overlook the sarcasm that Mr. Irwin suggested.And for that, I apologize ( very sorry Mr.Irwin).Perhaps I shouldn’t write comments at 1 am when I am up with a head cold! However from a rhetorical consideration, Mr. Dwyre ‘s article had many flaws and the construction of the article was my biggest complaint. His list contained unlike elements that needed to be separated in order for them to be addressed and as I said earlier, including Mr. Stronach’s statement in support of WHOA in a list with the mention of three individuals who were arrested at Penn was a very poor rhetorical construction error for a person who makes their living as a journalist for one of the nation’s leading newspapers to make. He could not draw a conclusive argument when his supporting facts were so disparate.

            I was referring to the construction of the argument as poor, so therefore the conclusion that he drew could not be sound.

            As for the direct subject matter, well I couldn’t possibly comment on that…(nicker laugh)

      • Don Reed

        “We how…” — Verb missing. Please provide.

        • Right then, Right now

          What year did you graduate Prig University?

    • Jay Stone

      Show any of these news sources a legitimate story involving any abuse of horses or cheating in this game and they would jump all over it.

  • Excellent piece Ray. Quite informative and also needed saying.

  • Hamish

    Any investigation or journalist that forces those in the line of fire to tell the truth, or lie and deny, is a good thing. So, investigative journalism must be even better. Per Kirk S. post, I wonder if the “60 Minutes” type shows are waiting for the right moment to come to the party?

  • Right then, Right now

    Too bad that when you were editor of The Blood-Horse you chose not to investigate the documented proof that Valley Creek Farm in California systematically used Artificial Insemination. Was it only a coincidence that the farm was owned by Jockey Club members Jack Liebau and Thomas Capehart? It’s too bad your newfound investigative reporting skills weren’t around ten years when whistle-blowing wasn’t in fashion.

    • Don Reed

      “Too bad that when you were editor of The Blood-Horse you chose not to investigate the documented proof that Valley Creek Farm in California systematically used Artificial Insemination.”

      A chronology is absolutely necessary in order for the above to be a meaningful statement.

      What years are you referring to in reference to Ray’s editorship at TBH?

      What years (start; end) did Valley Creek, according to your documentation, “systematically” artificially inseminate?

      If your draconian approach involves “systems,” then let’s ground the conversation in the essential context of referring to when things did (or did not) occur.

      • bingo

        Every breeding establishment in America that can afford it when warranted uses AI-get over it

      • Harry

        If A.I. were racings only problem, what a fine world this would be!

    • Matt D.

      Let me guess. With that moniker, specifically referencing that long forgotten (by most) dead story (2001) and finishing the post with a troll-like statement…might you be Michael Power, former owner of Siberian Express?

  • MA

    Investigative reporters tend to also be formally educated in journalism, unlike bloggers which are growing in numbers while the others die away. That’s what sets your “blog” apart.

  • Barry Irwin

    Good piece Ray. I enjoyed it.

  • Big Fan

    Great piece Ray. It’s no coincidence that the deaths have stopped. I don’t believe Baffert is winning the same amount of races or in the same dominate fashion either, especially outside California. As an interesting sidebar, a week or so ago while listening to the Vet (who is a regular guest) speak on a popular racing radio show, he was trying to explain why some trainers do better than others when he slipped and said “some are better at mixing medications”. I found that interesting for two reasons. First, that he said it at all, and second, it drew zero follow up from the host.

    • Knowitall

      And you hit on what might have happened at Hollywood Park and not at Baffert’s main barn at Santa Anita. A possibly very unintentional mix. Otherwise, not sure I agree about Baffert’s dominant winning – his bar is set pretty high and his numbers are still way up there. As for racing outside of California, he does fine with that, see Game On Dude’s Clark and Charles Town races, Midnight Lucky in NY, etc.

  • walter

    “Since those reports were published, Baffert hasn’t lost a single horse to sudden death.” If change is the goal, Ray, you are also a thoroughbred’s best friend. You are saving the precious lives of these animals who willfully give their lives for our entertainment. God bless you, Ray Paulick! Baffert, what a joke! 7 deaths in 16 months? Now, 0 deaths in 8 months since the investigation? These deaths were not a coincedence! How dare the apathetic CHRB move to exonerate such incriminating evidence…

  • Jay Stone

    Anybody who brings a hidden subject to the public should be welcomed with open arms. From The Pentagon Papers to Watergate to present day corrupt politicians one thing stands out. It took someone to investigate the problem and bring it to the eye of the public. As long as you keep digging Ray the industry has a chance to prosper. If it wasn’t for Woodward and Bernstein the history of this country could be much different.

    • Tinky

      While I am sympathetic to your basic point, you’d have been well advised to leave off the final sentence. This country is far, far more corrupt, and mainstream media organizations are far more deeply captured than was the case in the ’70s.

      • Barry Irwin

        Jay’s last sentence is absolutely with merit.

    • Jay Stone

      My main point is that without investigative journalists and whistleblowers we have no chance for the corruption to be discovered. Watergate was an example of journalists helping to bring down a sitting president. While it is definitely true the corruption is far more prevalent today and media is more controlled by big business we need investigative journalists more today than ever. The horse racing business which is a microcosm of the real world needs people like Ray to bring these issues to the attention of the public. Exposing these issues which look bad at the start can only help improve them in the long run. If we only depended on mainstream journalists who are not inclined to dig into stories there would be nobody to “speak to power”.

      • Tinky

        We are in complete agreement.

        • Jay Stone

          While I totally agree that news print both mainstream and alternative has basically dropped the ball when it comes to investigating issues it appears the internet and social media has picked up the slack. These forms of communication are more encompassing and quicker than the old forms. If you can get an issue out there enough people will see it and despite
          The powers that be it will eventually be addressed.

          • azeri1

            Yes Jay social media and it’s innovative form of journalism has certainly quickened the pace of journalism.We have flash reporting available to us 24/7. More people have forums and more individuals have an opportunity to publically express their opinions and reach others than ever before.

            The only down side of this is that news that is uncorroborated is disseminated to the main stream more frequently and retractions and corrections are more prevalent due to the torrid pace of publishing.

          • Jay Stone

            Yes, there are many inaccuracies reported by people sitting in their living rooms wanting to be heard. The good part of this is that the truths quickly surface due to the speed of the internet and the size of the audience. Much good can come from this process which occasionally yields information that is incorrect.

          • azeri1

            Yes that is true. It is highly contrastive with the classic ethics of journalism that we used to aspire to uphold,but things are changing and now the truth finds its own way of coming into the light. Even if many journalists/citizen bloggers are no longer aware of the gravitas with which those of us who were trained “old school” hold the tenets of fact checking and refraining from libel, they are still committed to reporting news and making sure people have a forum for access and a belief in transparency. Here’s to change and progress!

          • Jay Stone

            Like any new enterprise, which the internet is, there will always be quirks to work out. With print going out of style everything will eventually end up on the internet. In the real world you were taught to check and recheck sources but in this world of high speed that might be overlooked by sheer volume of particlpants. Many mistakes can and will be made as 60 minutes recently found out but truth will eventually surface. As Ray Paulick has shown if you preserve eventually somebody notices and reacts.

  • Roger

    Quite interesting and so true.

  • Harry

    Undercover officers need to be put at every racetrack in the U.S. and all of them should pose as lowly grooms, the kind that vets and trainers never think twice about doing things in front of. (Often asking the grooms to hold the horse) This industry would explode!

    • 4Bellwether666

      The undercover gig you speak of has been back there for a number of years…The big question is what is the Fed going to do about it as it involves the IHA and the outright fixing of the Horse races coast to coast???…The powers that be have circled the wagons and are trying to fend them off…But they may have waited to long…Stay tuned…ps… Yea explode for the betterment of “The Game”!!!…ty…

      • Harry

        I hope you are correct, but I have my doubts about things changing. Even at one racetrack where the so called “model rules” are suppose to be in effect, it is the good old boy system, wink, wink, nod, nod. I don’t know it the Chief Vet is too worried about rocking the boat or if she truly does not realize what is going on. Vets giving Lasix and walking out to their trucks with the state witness in tow and coming right back in with follow up meds while the witness sits in the vehicle. Injecting drugs at first call to the paddock, etc.

        • Ann M. Adam

          It is SO annoying when someone complains about what wasn’t done in the past when ALL attention should be on what IS being done HERE & NOW!!! We all need to march FORWARD and demand better. Just STOP all this over-the-shoulder pointing and complaining! Join up and help in a positive manner from now forward.

  • Name

    I’d make a great undercover.

    • Don Reed

      Impossible. We already know your Name.

    • equine avenger

      Why do you think so many barns are full of Mexicans, many being illegals with fake ids? Trainers prefer hiring these types today because of the Mr Shultz effect. They know nothing, see nothing, hear nothing and speak nothing…….and that helps to eliminate the possible undercover…….just the way the cheat trainer likes it.

      If you are an American, you’d have a slim to zero chance of getting hired in many of these barns.

  • azeri1

    And now that many of us have wandered far afield from the topic at hand, CONGRATULATIONS Ray on winning the Stan Bergstein Writing Award. We appreciate what you do for speaking up for the jockeys and the horses and helping to advocate on behalf of OTTBs. You’re there when a good cause needs a friend and a voice!

  • Trey

    Yeah nothing like hiring your own private investigators to help clean up the business! Was there any proof back in the day that Behrens was being milkshaked, or is this another random accusation to help generate another article? Some more drama? Michael Dickinson while brilliant is one flew over the cuckoo’s nest.

    • 4Bellwether666

      Mike Dickinson is cuckoo like a fox…

  • 4Bellwether666

    “The Truth” and nothing but “The Truth” is all that matter’s to honest human beings…By all means the PR needs to keep on digging and help “The Game” rid itself of the horrendous animal abuse/race fixing cheaters once and for all!!!…ty…

  • Richard C

    You will find that the classy people who live in public – whether in sports, politics or entertainment industries – understand that they will get beat up in the media at some point, but only ask to have a chance to present their “talking” points….and are not misquoted. Those who ask for more – or are given more by media members, for any number of reasons – play the manipulative game that can eventually get shredded due to the web of lies and deceit.

  • betterthannothing

    Two fantastic investigative reporters who were among the first ones to expose gross abuse of horses and drugs in racing are:

    – Scott M. Reid, from the Orange Country Register, voted Best Reporter in Orange County – 2013 ” by OC Weekly: “From its beat reporters to columnists (especially with the recent addition of longtime Los Angeles Times crank T.J. Simers) to editors, it’s a Murderer’s Row of scribes, yet none is better than Olympics and investigative reporter Scott M. Reid. In just the past two years, Reid’s reporting has brought down lifetime bans on gymnastics and swimming coaches for their perverted ways and looked into how the fearsome Zetas drug cartel infiltrated the Los Alamitos Race Course, all while covering the Olympics, gymnastics,
    swimming, even the stray football story with crisp, engaging writing.”

    Reid’s 3-part series titled: “Bad Bets” is a must read as well as more recently articles including “How Los Alamitos Horse Trainer Got Mixed With Zetas Drug Cartel” and “Los Alamitos Trainer Farias Given Probation”.

    – Pete Herrera, “a former AP sportswriter and now freelance journalist who covered sports and news for 39 years. His credits include four Summer Olympics and coverage of 40 All American Futurities from 1968 to 2008.” Herrera wrote a smashing 3-part series starting with (paraphrasing) “There is Magic in the Mix” published by Sure Bet Racing News a few years ago.

  • Patricia Jones

    congrats on a job well done however there are mountains of corruption still out there and a whole lot fed up fans

  • walter

    Simple. Put a security guard in Baffert’s barn 24/7 and you will see his win % drop to 10%. Guaranteed.

  • Patricia Hooker

    I wish this could actually do make the changes that is needed. I have a friend who has his trainer’s license and used to race Thoroughbreds until a filly who he trainer started doing well and the other power that be caused an accident where this filly broke both front legs, they killed her and he walked away from training Thoroughbreds. I had a Arabian mare I bought who had many generations of racing blood in her and the owner/ trained Thoroughbred and Arabians. But the mixture of vitamins and minerals, she called it her “yum-yums”, that she gave her horses in training also made her not be able to get in foal and I do believe this is not uncommon. I do think that more stallions are coming up not being able to breed foals and behavioral problems that can not be explained away. I do know that insurance companies have found out that people were killing horses to collect liability insurance made out for these horses in all breeds and just for Thoroughbreds for money.

  • Convene

    Exactly. Shining light on deeds done in the dark is the first – and necessary – step in the road to positive change. Excellent piece, Ray.

  • Paul

    A good start but only the tip of the iceberg. Horses should run clean period. It’s horse racing not a chemistry class. Better training strategies with good breeding practices would bring the sport again to a national pastime.

  • cheri

    Everyone who is brave enough to delve into details of diabolical behaviors meted out by humans on innocent horses earns props from House of Vaughan…especially those who are in a position to bravely announce their discoveries of evil to the public.

Twitter Twitter
Paulick Report on Instagram