Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
The Post there in NY is regularly full of misinformation.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
The Post there in NY is regularly full of misinformation.
I find it interesting though because it IS misinformation. The Post is a shitty paper but happened to notice the headline.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
my thoughts are an algorithm cant discern nuance or context with a given thing......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
my thoughts are an algorithm cant discern nuance or context with a given thing......
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
I think PJ owns the rights to things and you aren't allowed to broadcast the music part? I think it's dumb. Let me watch the video.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
I think PJ owns the rights to things and you aren't allowed to broadcast the music part? I think it's dumb. Let me watch the video.
That's what I'm saying. I don't think PJ has ever hit me with a strike. It was Eagle or an affiliated third party.
Remember for me this is video and the music, not just the music. But it's fan cam.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
Any new recommendations? I think MSG 2016 N1 was a recent one? Loved that show. And getting to avoid the special guests from N2.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
Any new recommendations? I think MSG 2016 N1 was a recent one? Loved that show. And getting to avoid the special guests from N2.
Yeah those were the last two PJs I did. I am working on the Oaklands now. They will be amazing. There were three of us that all recorded in 4k with Lumix FZ80s, so the quality is off the charts. Plus I have about 8 songs front row, center pit in 1080 just to mix in.
I'm not sure if I think N1 or N2 MSG was better. Got a little tired of the Cheap Trick stuff as it was in Lauderdale and Moline. Sting coming out was cool though. But I think Driven to Tears is a great song.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
Any new recommendations? I think MSG 2016 N1 was a recent one? Loved that show. And getting to avoid the special guests from N2.
Yeah those were the last two PJs I did. I am working on the Oaklands now. They will be amazing. There were three of us that all recorded in 4k with Lumix FZ80s, so the quality is off the charts. Plus I have about 8 songs front row, center pit in 1080 just to mix in.
I'm not sure if I think N1 or N2 MSG was better. Got a little tired of the Cheap Trick stuff as it was in Lauderdale and Moline. Sting coming out was cool though. But I think Driven to Tears is a great song.
Wow, can’t wait. Every show is a great one. As I say too often, I was a few rows behind Matt N1, will never forget opened with Go, the place was shaking so bad, fell over a few people. I promise, it wasn’t the stoli.
Cover story on the post here in NY. Guy from the Post interviewed someone inside the Capital and it's posted on Youtube. It helped convict the person and Youtube took it down.
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
What was misinformation? Was the guy rambling on a bunch of nonsense about stopping the steal? Your question does not provide enough context.
Yes. The interviewed was doing the rambling.
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
You didn’t post anything of the article nor provided a link. And it’s the fucking Post. I’m not giving Rupert’s hate outlet clicks. I don’t trust anything printed in the Post because of Rupert and his ilk of white grievances. Nothing personal but please find better sources of information.
It was a Post interview from the Post... They were the source. You wouldn't have clicked a link anyways. It was a question that I was curious about.
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
So what’s the context? YouTube removes videos all the time for some violation of their terms of service. Was the headline arguing it’s a gross violation of our freedom of speech? Did the byline mention Hunter’s laptop? Difficult to comment without the context but in general, I don’t give a fuck if YouTube is taking down videos of or by insurrectionists.
I have received strikes from You Tube. I don't feel like I'm being oppressed though. I clearly violated terms, but it's just a question of whether the receive a complaint.
I've been flagged on FB from FB and not a person. What did you do on Youtube to warrant a "strike". I haven't made a Youtube video in a long time that wasn't a sneaker video, lol.
For example my 2016 Wrigley II full show was taken down. It had garnered about 800k views in only a few weeks, but I think the company that produced Let's Play Two lodged a complaint (Eagle I believe). I think Moline is down too now. It's sort of random and I know it's not PJ. I think it's when there is something official associated with it, the third party makes teh request.
Any new recommendations? I think MSG 2016 N1 was a recent one? Loved that show. And getting to avoid the special guests from N2.
Yeah those were the last two PJs I did. I am working on the Oaklands now. They will be amazing. There were three of us that all recorded in 4k with Lumix FZ80s, so the quality is off the charts. Plus I have about 8 songs front row, center pit in 1080 just to mix in.
I'm not sure if I think N1 or N2 MSG was better. Got a little tired of the Cheap Trick stuff as it was in Lauderdale and Moline. Sting coming out was cool though. But I think Driven to Tears is a great song.
Wow, can’t wait. Every show is a great one. As I say too often, I was a few rows behind Matt N1, will never forget opened with Go, the place was shaking so bad, fell over a few people. I promise, it wasn’t the stoli.
There is no debating that the floor moves at MSG. You can see it and feel it.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden delivered the verdict from the bench after hearing two days of testimony without a jury for the trial of Kevin Seefried and his adult son, Hunter.
McFadden convicted both Delaware men of a felony count: obstruction of an official proceeding, the joint session of Congress for certifying the Electoral College that day.
The judge also convicted the Seefrieds of misdemeanor charges that they engaged in disorderly conduct and illegally demonstrated inside the building. But he acquitted Hunter Seefried of other misdemeanor charges for clearing a shard of glass from a broken window at the Capitol.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
From Heather Cox Richardson's newsletter last night:
"June 15, 2022 (Wednesday)
In a letter to Georgia Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) this morning, the chair of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Bennie Thompson (D-MS), dropped information, images, and video showing that Loudermilk had led individuals through the U.S. Capitol complex on January 5, 2021, in what sure looks like a reconnaissance tour.
Thompson wrote that the committee had reviewed surveillance video, social media activity, and witness accounts and understood that Loudermilk led approximately 10 people “to areas in the Rayburn, Longworth, and Cannon House Office Buildings, as well as the entrances to tunnels leading to the U.S. Capitol,” on January 5, “despite the complex being closed to the public on that day.” The group “stayed for several hours.” “Individuals on the tour photographed and recorded areas of the complex not typically of interest to tourists, including hallways, staircases, and security checkpoints…. Their behavior…raises concerns about their activity and intent while inside the Capitol complex.”
The letter went on to note that some of the people Loudermilk showed around the complex attended the January 6 rally at the Ellipse and that some of them joined the unpermitted march from the Ellipse to the Capitol. It quotes a video one of them made of the march, saying: “There’s no escape, Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler. We’re coming for you…. They got it surrounded. It’s all the way up there on the hill, and it’s all the way around, and they’re coming in, coming in like white on rice for Pelosi, Nadler, even you, AOC. We’re coming to take you out and pull you out….”
The letter noted—somewhat dryly, I have to say—that the information it has “raises questions the Select Committee must answer.” There have been accounts of surveillance tours since immediately after January 6, when Democratic members of Congress claimed to have seen them, and 34 Democrats led by Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) wrote to Capitol Police asking them to investigate. Republicans, though, insisted that was inaccurate, saying that “There were no tours, no large groups, no one with MAGA hats on. There’s nothing in there remotely fitting the depiction in Mikie Sherrill’s letter.”
Now there is video and photographic evidence of just such a tour—even including someone in a MAGA hat—as well as a report that the committee has talked to the man to whom Thompson referred in his letter. This opens up a whole new can of congressional worms.
On May 19 the committee had asked Loudermilk to come in and review the evidence it had. He refused.
On Monday, Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger wrote a letter to Representative Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, a committee on which Loudermilk sits. Manger wrote that surveillance video showed Loudermilk with a group of approximately 12 people that later grew to 15, but that “[t]here is no evidence that Representative Loudermilk entered the U.S. Capitol with this group on January 5, 2021,” nor did the group with Loudermilk "appear in any tunnels that would lead them to the US Capitol." “We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance,” Manger wrote, “and we do not consider any of the activities we observed as suspicious."
Yesterday, Loudermilk chimed in: “The truth will always prevail. As I’ve said since the Jan. 6 Committee made their baseless accusation about me to the media, I never gave a tour of the Capitol on Jan 5, 2021… and a small group visiting their congressman is in no way a suspicious activity. Now the Capitol Police have confirmed this fact.”
Now that we have the video evidence, the statements by Manger and Loudermilk illustrate exactly how someone can misdirect an observer without directly lying. In fact, Thompson’s letter supports Manger’s claim that neither the group nor Loudermilk were in the tunnels themselves. They were photographing the entrances, checkpoints, and staircases used by members of Congress. But the misdirection worked: The AP News headline covering Manger’s letter read: “Police: Republican’s tour of Capitol complex not suspicious...”
Some Capitol rioters try to profit from their Jan. 6 crimes
By MICHAEL KUNZELMAN
Today
Facing prison time and dire personal consequences for storming the U.S. Capitol, some Jan. 6 defendants are trying to profit from their participation in the deadly riot, using it as a platform to drum up cash, promote business endeavors and boost social media profiles.
A Nevada man jailed on riot charges asked his mother to contact publishers for a book he was writing about “the Capitol incident.” A rioter from Washington state helped his father hawk clothes and other merchandise bearing slogans such as “Our House” and images of the Capitol building. A Virginia man released a rap album with riot-themed songs and a cover photograph of him sitting on a police vehicle outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Those actions are sometimes complicating matters for defendants when they face judges at sentencing as prosecutors point to the profit-chasing activities in seeking tougher punishments. The Justice Department, in some instances, is trying to claw back money that rioters have made off the insurrection.
In one case, federal authorities have seized tens of thousands of dollars from a defendant who sold his footage from Jan. 6. In another case, a Florida man's plea deal allows the U.S. government to collect profits from any book he gets published over the next five years. And prosecutors want a Maine man who raised more than $20,000 from supporters to surrender some of the money because a taxpayer-funded public defender is representing him.
Many rioters have paid a steep personal price for their actions on Jan. 6. At sentencing, rioters often ask for leniency on the grounds that they already have experienced severe consequences for their crimes.
They lost jobs or entire careers. Marriages fell apart. Friends and relatives shunned them or even reported them to the FBI. Strangers have sent them hate mail and online threats. And they have racked up expensive legal bills to defend themselves against federal charges ranging from misdemeanors to serious felonies.
Websites and crowdfunding platforms set up to collect donations for Capitol riot defendants try to portray them as mistreated patriots or even political prisoners.
An anti-vaccine medical doctor who pleaded guilty to illegally entering the Capitol founded a nonprofit that raised more than $430,000 for her legal expenses. The fundraising appeal by Dr. Simone Gold’s group, America’s Frontline Doctors, didn’t mention her guilty plea, prosecutors noted.
Before sentencing Gold to two months behind bars, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper called it “unseemly” that her nonprofit invoked the Capitol riot to raise money that also paid for her salary. Prosecutors said in court papers that it “beggars belief” that she incurred anywhere close to $430,000 in legal costs for her misdemeanor case.
Another rioter, a New Jersey gym owner who punched a police officer during the siege, raised more than $30,000 in online donations for a “Patriot Relief Fund” to cover his mortgage payments and other monthly bills. Prosecutors cited the fund in recommending a fine for Scott Fairlamb, who is serving a prison sentence of more than three years.
“Fairlamb should not be able to ‘capitalize’ on his participation in the Capitol breach in this way,” Justice Department lawyers wrote.
Robert Palmer, a Florida man who attacked police officers at the Capitol, asked a friend to create a crowdfunding campaign for him online after he pleaded guilty. After seeing the campaign to “Help Patriot Rob,” a probation officer calculating a sentencing recommendation for Palmer didn’t give him credit for accepting responsibility for his conduct. Palmer conceded that a post for the campaign falsely portrayed his conduct on Jan. 6. Acceptance of responsibility can help shave months or even years off a sentence.
“When you threw the fire extinguisher and the plank at the police officers, were you acting in self-defense?” asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.
“No, ma’am, I was not,” Palmer said before the judge sentenced him to more than five years in prison.
A group calling itself the Patriot Freedom Project says it has raised more than $1 million in contributions and paid more than $665,000 in grants and legal fees for families of Capitol riot defendants.
In April, a New Jersey-based foundation associated with the group filed an IRS application for tax-exempt status. As of early August, an IRS database doesn’t list the foundation as a tax-exempt organization. The Hughes Foundation’s IRS application says its funds “principally” will benefit families of Jan. 6 defendants, with about 60% of the donated money going to foundation activities. The rest will cover management and fundraising expenses, including salaries, it adds.
Rioters have found other ways to enrich or promote themselves.
Jeremy Grace, who was sentenced to three weeks in jail for entering the Capitol, tried to profit off his participation by helping his dad sell T-shirts, baseball caps, water bottles, decals and other gear with phrases such as “Our House” and “Back the Blue” and images of the Capitol, prosecutors said.
Prosecutors said Grace's “audacity” to sell “Back the Blue" paraphernalia is “especially disturbing” because he watched other rioters confront police officers on Jan. 6. A defense lawyer, however, said Grace didn’t break any laws or earn any profits by helping his father sell the merchandise.
Federal authorities seized more than $62,000 from a bank account belonging to riot defendant John Earle Sullivan, a Utah man who earned more than $90,000 from selling his Jan. 6 video footage to at least six companies. Sullivan's lawyer argued authorities had no right to seize the money.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett, an Arkansas man photographed propping his feet up on a desk in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has charged donors $100 for photos of him with his feet on a desk while under house arrest. Defense lawyer Joseph McBride said prosecutors have “zero grounds” to prevent Barnett from raising money for his defense before a December trial date.
"Unlike the government, Mr. Barnett does not have the American Taxpayer footing the bill for his legal case," McBride wrote in a court filing.
Texas real estate agent Jennifer Leigh Ryan promoted her business on social media during and after the riot, boasting that she was “becoming famous.” In messages sent after Jan. 6, Ryan “contemplated the business she needed to prepare for as a result of the publicity she received from joining the mob at the Capitol,” prosecutors said in court documents.
Prosecutors cited the social media activity of Treniss Evans III in recommending a two-month jail term for the Texas man, who drank a shot of whiskey in a congressional conference room on Jan. 6. Evans has “aggressively exploited” his presence at the Capitol to expand his social media following on Gettr, a social media site founded by a former Trump adviser, prosecutors wrote before Evans' sentencing, scheduled for this coming Tuesday,
A few rioters are writing books about the mob’s attack or have marketed videos that they shot during the riot.
A unique provision in Adam Johnson’s plea agreement allows the U.S. government to collect profits from any book he gets published over the next five years. Images of Johnson posing for photographs with Pelosi’s podium went viral after the riot. Prosecutors said they insisted on the provision after learning that Johnson intends to write a memoir “of some sort.”
Ronald Sandlin, a Nevada man charged with assaulting officers near doors to the Senate gallery, posted on Facebook that he was “working out a Netflix deal” to sell riot video footage. Later, in a call from jail, Sandlin told his mother that he had met with right-wing author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and was in contact with podcaster Joe Rogan. He also asked his mom to contact publishers for the book he was writing about the "Capitol incident," prosecutors said.
“I hope to turn it into movie,” Sandlin wrote in a March 2021 text message. “I plan on having Leonardo DiCaprio play me,” he wrote, adding a smiley face emoji.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
I couldn't agree more.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://morningshots.thebulwark.com/p/the-gops-other-big-lie
Reason?
Misinformation.
Thoughts?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I feel like people are on attack mode and waiting to jump at me to disagree with this where I haven't even mentioned an opinion...
my thoughts are an algorithm cant discern nuance or context with a given thing......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I get the hate or the Post, I read the covers when I'm in the deli now because they stopped selling the Times so it's what I am stuck reading for 2 minutes...
I did chuckle, I got the gest.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Remember for me this is video and the music, not just the music. But it's fan cam.
I'm not sure if I think N1 or N2 MSG was better. Got a little tired of the Cheap Trick stuff as it was in Lauderdale and Moline. Sting coming out was cool though. But I think Driven to Tears is a great song.
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Wednesday convicted a Confederate flag-toting man and his son of charges that they stormed the U.S. Capitol together during the riot on Jan. 6, 2021, to obstruct Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s presidential victory.
U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden delivered the verdict from the bench after hearing two days of testimony without a jury for the trial of Kevin Seefried and his adult son, Hunter.
McFadden convicted both Delaware men of a felony count: obstruction of an official proceeding, the joint session of Congress for certifying the Electoral College that day.
The judge also convicted the Seefrieds of misdemeanor charges that they engaged in disorderly conduct and illegally demonstrated inside the building. But he acquitted Hunter Seefried of other misdemeanor charges for clearing a shard of glass from a broken window at the Capitol.
continues.....
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
-EV 8/14/93
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
From Heather Cox Richardson's newsletter last night:
"June 15, 2022 (Wednesday)
In a letter to Georgia Representative Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) this morning, the chair of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, Bennie Thompson (D-MS), dropped information, images, and video showing that Loudermilk had led individuals through the U.S. Capitol complex on January 5, 2021, in what sure looks like a reconnaissance tour.
Thompson wrote that the committee had reviewed surveillance video, social media activity, and witness accounts and understood that Loudermilk led approximately 10 people “to areas in the Rayburn, Longworth, and Cannon House Office Buildings, as well as the entrances to tunnels leading to the U.S. Capitol,” on January 5, “despite the complex being closed to the public on that day.” The group “stayed for several hours.” “Individuals on the tour photographed and recorded areas of the complex not typically of interest to tourists, including hallways, staircases, and security checkpoints…. Their behavior…raises concerns about their activity and intent while inside the Capitol complex.”
The letter went on to note that some of the people Loudermilk showed around the complex attended the January 6 rally at the Ellipse and that some of them joined the unpermitted march from the Ellipse to the Capitol. It quotes a video one of them made of the march, saying: “There’s no escape, Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler. We’re coming for you…. They got it surrounded. It’s all the way up there on the hill, and it’s all the way around, and they’re coming in, coming in like white on rice for Pelosi, Nadler, even you, AOC. We’re coming to take you out and pull you out….”
The letter noted—somewhat dryly, I have to say—that the information it has “raises questions the Select Committee must answer.” There have been accounts of surveillance tours since immediately after January 6, when Democratic members of Congress claimed to have seen them, and 34 Democrats led by Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) wrote to Capitol Police asking them to investigate. Republicans, though, insisted that was inaccurate, saying that “There were no tours, no large groups, no one with MAGA hats on. There’s nothing in there remotely fitting the depiction in Mikie Sherrill’s letter.”
Now there is video and photographic evidence of just such a tour—even including someone in a MAGA hat—as well as a report that the committee has talked to the man to whom Thompson referred in his letter. This opens up a whole new can of congressional worms.
On May 19 the committee had asked Loudermilk to come in and review the evidence it had. He refused.
On Monday, Capitol Police Chief Tom Manger wrote a letter to Representative Rodney Davis, the top Republican on the House Administration Committee, a committee on which Loudermilk sits. Manger wrote that surveillance video showed Loudermilk with a group of approximately 12 people that later grew to 15, but that “[t]here is no evidence that Representative Loudermilk entered the U.S. Capitol with this group on January 5, 2021,” nor did the group with Loudermilk "appear in any tunnels that would lead them to the US Capitol." “We train our officers on being alert for people conducting surveillance or reconnaissance,” Manger wrote, “and we do not consider any of the activities we observed as suspicious."
Yesterday, Loudermilk chimed in: “The truth will always prevail. As I’ve said since the Jan. 6 Committee made their baseless accusation about me to the media, I never gave a tour of the Capitol on Jan 5, 2021… and a small group visiting their congressman is in no way a suspicious activity. Now the Capitol Police have confirmed this fact.”
Now that we have the video evidence, the statements by Manger and Loudermilk illustrate exactly how someone can misdirect an observer without directly lying. In fact, Thompson’s letter supports Manger’s claim that neither the group nor Loudermilk were in the tunnels themselves. They were photographing the entrances, checkpoints, and staircases used by members of Congress. But the misdirection worked: The AP News headline covering Manger’s letter read: “Police: Republican’s tour of Capitol complex not suspicious...”
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Facing prison time and dire personal consequences for storming the U.S. Capitol, some Jan. 6 defendants are trying to profit from their participation in the deadly riot, using it as a platform to drum up cash, promote business endeavors and boost social media profiles.
A Nevada man jailed on riot charges asked his mother to contact publishers for a book he was writing about “the Capitol incident.” A rioter from Washington state helped his father hawk clothes and other merchandise bearing slogans such as “Our House” and images of the Capitol building. A Virginia man released a rap album with riot-themed songs and a cover photograph of him sitting on a police vehicle outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Those actions are sometimes complicating matters for defendants when they face judges at sentencing as prosecutors point to the profit-chasing activities in seeking tougher punishments. The Justice Department, in some instances, is trying to claw back money that rioters have made off the insurrection.
In one case, federal authorities have seized tens of thousands of dollars from a defendant who sold his footage from Jan. 6. In another case, a Florida man's plea deal allows the U.S. government to collect profits from any book he gets published over the next five years. And prosecutors want a Maine man who raised more than $20,000 from supporters to surrender some of the money because a taxpayer-funded public defender is representing him.
CAPITOL SIEGE
Ex-Yakima commissioner candidate sentenced for Jan. 6 role
Ex-police officer gets 7-plus years in prison in Jan. 6 case
Florida man pleads guilty to pushing police in Capitol riot
'Self-professed' white supremacist gets jail for Jan. 6 riot
Many rioters have paid a steep personal price for their actions on Jan. 6. At sentencing, rioters often ask for leniency on the grounds that they already have experienced severe consequences for their crimes.
They lost jobs or entire careers. Marriages fell apart. Friends and relatives shunned them or even reported them to the FBI. Strangers have sent them hate mail and online threats. And they have racked up expensive legal bills to defend themselves against federal charges ranging from misdemeanors to serious felonies.
Websites and crowdfunding platforms set up to collect donations for Capitol riot defendants try to portray them as mistreated patriots or even political prisoners.
An anti-vaccine medical doctor who pleaded guilty to illegally entering the Capitol founded a nonprofit that raised more than $430,000 for her legal expenses. The fundraising appeal by Dr. Simone Gold’s group, America’s Frontline Doctors, didn’t mention her guilty plea, prosecutors noted.
Before sentencing Gold to two months behind bars, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper called it “unseemly” that her nonprofit invoked the Capitol riot to raise money that also paid for her salary. Prosecutors said in court papers that it “beggars belief” that she incurred anywhere close to $430,000 in legal costs for her misdemeanor case.
Another rioter, a New Jersey gym owner who punched a police officer during the siege, raised more than $30,000 in online donations for a “Patriot Relief Fund” to cover his mortgage payments and other monthly bills. Prosecutors cited the fund in recommending a fine for Scott Fairlamb, who is serving a prison sentence of more than three years.
“Fairlamb should not be able to ‘capitalize’ on his participation in the Capitol breach in this way,” Justice Department lawyers wrote.
Robert Palmer, a Florida man who attacked police officers at the Capitol, asked a friend to create a crowdfunding campaign for him online after he pleaded guilty. After seeing the campaign to “Help Patriot Rob,” a probation officer calculating a sentencing recommendation for Palmer didn’t give him credit for accepting responsibility for his conduct. Palmer conceded that a post for the campaign falsely portrayed his conduct on Jan. 6. Acceptance of responsibility can help shave months or even years off a sentence.
“When you threw the fire extinguisher and the plank at the police officers, were you acting in self-defense?” asked U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.
“No, ma’am, I was not,” Palmer said before the judge sentenced him to more than five years in prison.
A group calling itself the Patriot Freedom Project says it has raised more than $1 million in contributions and paid more than $665,000 in grants and legal fees for families of Capitol riot defendants.
In April, a New Jersey-based foundation associated with the group filed an IRS application for tax-exempt status. As of early August, an IRS database doesn’t list the foundation as a tax-exempt organization. The Hughes Foundation’s IRS application says its funds “principally” will benefit families of Jan. 6 defendants, with about 60% of the donated money going to foundation activities. The rest will cover management and fundraising expenses, including salaries, it adds.
Rioters have found other ways to enrich or promote themselves.
Jeremy Grace, who was sentenced to three weeks in jail for entering the Capitol, tried to profit off his participation by helping his dad sell T-shirts, baseball caps, water bottles, decals and other gear with phrases such as “Our House” and “Back the Blue” and images of the Capitol, prosecutors said.
Prosecutors said Grace's “audacity” to sell “Back the Blue" paraphernalia is “especially disturbing” because he watched other rioters confront police officers on Jan. 6. A defense lawyer, however, said Grace didn’t break any laws or earn any profits by helping his father sell the merchandise.
Federal authorities seized more than $62,000 from a bank account belonging to riot defendant John Earle Sullivan, a Utah man who earned more than $90,000 from selling his Jan. 6 video footage to at least six companies. Sullivan's lawyer argued authorities had no right to seize the money.
Richard “Bigo” Barnett, an Arkansas man photographed propping his feet up on a desk in the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has charged donors $100 for photos of him with his feet on a desk while under house arrest. Defense lawyer Joseph McBride said prosecutors have “zero grounds” to prevent Barnett from raising money for his defense before a December trial date.
"Unlike the government, Mr. Barnett does not have the American Taxpayer footing the bill for his legal case," McBride wrote in a court filing.
Texas real estate agent Jennifer Leigh Ryan promoted her business on social media during and after the riot, boasting that she was “becoming famous.” In messages sent after Jan. 6, Ryan “contemplated the business she needed to prepare for as a result of the publicity she received from joining the mob at the Capitol,” prosecutors said in court documents.
Prosecutors cited the social media activity of Treniss Evans III in recommending a two-month jail term for the Texas man, who drank a shot of whiskey in a congressional conference room on Jan. 6. Evans has “aggressively exploited” his presence at the Capitol to expand his social media following on Gettr, a social media site founded by a former Trump adviser, prosecutors wrote before Evans' sentencing, scheduled for this coming Tuesday,
A few rioters are writing books about the mob’s attack or have marketed videos that they shot during the riot.
A unique provision in Adam Johnson’s plea agreement allows the U.S. government to collect profits from any book he gets published over the next five years. Images of Johnson posing for photographs with Pelosi’s podium went viral after the riot. Prosecutors said they insisted on the provision after learning that Johnson intends to write a memoir “of some sort.”
Ronald Sandlin, a Nevada man charged with assaulting officers near doors to the Senate gallery, posted on Facebook that he was “working out a Netflix deal” to sell riot video footage. Later, in a call from jail, Sandlin told his mother that he had met with right-wing author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and was in contact with podcaster Joe Rogan. He also asked his mom to contact publishers for the book he was writing about the "Capitol incident," prosecutors said.
“I hope to turn it into movie,” Sandlin wrote in a March 2021 text message. “I plan on having Leonardo DiCaprio play me,” he wrote, adding a smiley face emoji.
___
For full coverage of the Capitol riot, go to https://www.apnews.com/capitol-siege
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14