Auto-Save Draft feature temporarily disabled. Please be sure you manually save your post by selecting "Save Draft" if you have that need.

Jan 6 Select Committee

1234568»

Comments

  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 23,196
    edited November 23
    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 9,225
    mickeyrat said:
    Now it's officially a  circus
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 23,196


    Oath Keepers, Proud Boys subpoenaed by Jan. 6 House panel
    By FARNOUSH AMIRI
    42 mins ago

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol insurrection issued more subpoenas Tuesday, this time to extremist organizations, including the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers as well as their leaders, in an attempt to uncover the plotting and execution of the deadly attack.

    “The Select Committee is seeking information from individuals and organizations reportedly involved with planning the attack, with the violent mob that stormed the Capitol on January 6th, or with efforts to overturn the results of the election," Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the Democratic chairman of the panel, said in a statement.

    The subpoenas are the latest in a wide net the House panel has cast in an effort to investigate the riot, when supporters of former President Donald Trump, fueled by his false claims of a stolen election, brutally assaulted police and smashed their way into the Capitol to interrupt the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.

    The committee has already interviewed more than 150 people across government, social media and law enforcement, including some former Trump aides who have been cooperative. The panel has subpoenaed more than 20 witnesses, and most of them, including several who helped plan the “Stop the Steal” rally the morning of Jan. 6, have signaled they will cooperate.

    The subpoenas were issued to members of the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys and 1st Amendment Praetorian, including Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, for documents and testimony.

    Tarrio, chairman of the Proud Boys, hasn’t been charged in the riot as he wasn’t there on Jan. 6. He’d been arrested in an unrelated vandalism case as he arrived in Washington two days earlier and was ordered out of the area by a judge. Law enforcement later said Tarrio was picked up in part to help quell potential violence.

    But despite him not being physically present, the committee believes he may have been involved in the Proud Boys’ preparation for the events at the Capitol.

    More than 30 Proud Boys leaders, members or associates are among those who have been charged in connection with the attack. The group of self-described “Western chauvinists” emerged from far-right fringes during the Trump administration to join mainstream GOP circles, with allies like longtime Trump backer Roger Stone. The group claims it has more than 30,000 members nationwide.

    The committee on Tuesday also subpoenaed the Oath Keepers — a militia group founded in 2009 that recruits current and former military, police and first responders — and its founder and leader Elmer Stewart Rhodes. The panel says Rhodes may have suggested members should engage in violence to ensure their preferred election outcome and that he was in contact with several of the more than a dozen indicted Oath Keepers members before, during and after the Capitol attack, including meeting some of them outside the Capitol.

    Rhodes has said there were as many as 40,000 Oath Keepers at its peak, but one extremism expert estimates the group’s membership stands around 3,000 nationally.

    The last organization on the committee’s list Tuesday was the 1st Amendment Praetorian, founded by a QAnon believer, that claims to provide free security for “patriotic and religious events across the country.”

    Its chairman, Robert Patrick Lewis, is wanted by the committee after being listed as a speaker on the permit for a Jan. 5 rally on Freedom Plaza in downtown Washington. On the day of the attack, Lewis tweeted: “Today is the day that true battles begin.”


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 23,196

     

    Former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows cooperating with Jan. 6 committee

    Meadows has provided records to the committee investigating the attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob and will give a deposition

    White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows greets Trump supporters on Oct. 31, 2020, during a campaign rally in Reading, Pa. (Carlos Barria/Reuters)
    Today at 12:28 p.m. EST|Updated today at 1:11 p.m. EST

    Mark Meadows, President Donald Trump’s chief of staff at the time of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, is cooperating with the House committee investigating the pro-Trump insurrection, the committee’s chairman, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.), said Tuesday.

    “Mr. Meadows has been engaging with the Select Committee through his attorney,” Thompson said in a statement. “He has produced records to the committee and will soon appear for an initial deposition.”

    Meadows is the highest-profile member of Trump’s inner circle who is known to be cooperating or who the committee has publicly acknowledged is cooperating. Committee members have previously said many people with connections to the events of that day have voluntarily engaged with investigators, but they have not specified who those individuals are or how high up they were in the Trump administration.

    The House select committee investigating the attempted insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6 faces an uphill battle with former Trump administration officials. (Blair Guild/The Washington Post)

    Thompson, in his statement, said that the committee “expects all witnesses, including Mr. Meadows, to provide all information requested and that the Select Committee is lawfully entitled to receive.”

    “The committee will continue to assess his degree of compliance with our subpoena after the deposition,” Thompson concluded.

    CNN first reported Meadows’s cooperation.

    Details of the deal Meadows struck with the committee were not made public. While Meadows has now produced records for the committee and will sit before it, he could still try to claim executive privilege to protect certain pieces of information, making the cooperation fragile.

    In a statement, Meadows’s lawyer, George Terwilliger III, told The Washington Post that Meadows and his team “continue to work with the Select Committee and its staff to see if we can reach an accommodation that does not require Mr. Meadows to waive Executive Privilege or to forfeit the long-standing position that senior White House aides cannot be compelled to testify before Congress.”

    “We appreciate the Select Committee’s openness to receiving voluntary responses on non-privileged topics,” Terwilliger said.

    The bipartisan committee is investigating the attack on the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob determined to stop the affirmation of Joe Biden’s presidential win. The riot left five people dead and injured some 140 members of law enforcement who faced a barrage of sticks, bear spray, flagpoles and other items used as weapons.

    Earlier this month, White House Deputy Counsel Jonathan Su sent a letter to Terwilliger notifying him that President Biden will not assert executive privilege or immunity over the documents and deposition requested by the committee related to his client.

    As Thompson issued his statement on Meadows, federal judges were questioning whether Trump has the power to go to court to keep White House documents secret from the congressional committee. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit expressed skepticism about the role of the courts in settling disputes between a former president and the sitting president over the release of White House records.

    Meadows was subpoenaed by the committee at the end of September and has been “engaged” with investigators to negotiate the terms of his deposition and the turning over of documents. The pace of these discussions, however, caused the committee to weigh more aggressive measures against him.

    On Twitter, Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), a member of the committee, said Meadows “has a legal and moral obligation to cooperate with our committee.”

    “I’m glad he has now agreed to appear and has already provided documents,” Schiff said. “We will evaluate the extent of his compliance after his testimony. We must reveal the full truth of what led to January 6.”

    The news on Meadows’s cooperation deal comes a day after the select committee announced that it will move to hold Jeffrey Clark, a top official in the Trump Justice Department, in criminal contempt for not complying with its subpoena. A committee vote is expected Wednesday. Meadows’s decision to cooperate could spare him the same treatment.

    Stephen K. Bannon, a former Trump adviser, was indicted by a federal grand jury on two counts of contempt of Congress for defying a congressional subpoena.

    Jacqueline Alemany contributed to this report.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 23,196
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • tempo_n_groovetempo_n_groove Posts: 29,198
    Meadows is a Trump loyalist though, no?  They "negotiated" what documents he will give to them.  I'm sure he will give them nothing and will claim executive privilege on the good stuff.

    Hopefully they crack open one egg sooner or later and get some good information.
  • dankinddankind I am not your foot. Posts: 18,800
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 23,275
    edited December 1
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
  • static111static111 Posts: 2,939
    mrussel1 said:
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
    What laws could stop another 1/6 if the existing laws didnt?  It's like our gun problem...more laws aren't going to solve anything.  We need a societal shift of some kind.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 23,275
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
    What laws could stop another 1/6 if the existing laws didnt?  It's like our gun problem...more laws aren't going to solve anything.  We need a societal shift of some kind.
    I can't say I'm enough of an expert to know at this point, since we don't know what the core issue.  However, the Election law of 1877 could make 'more' clear that the VP has no power to reject any certified electors.  We could also clarify which electors would be accepted by the Congress, in the event that more than one set is submitted.  This was the crux of the plan by the most diabolical of his minions; to have the VP reject the certified electors and accept other ones.  And/or for the VP to reject them and immediately throw the election to the House.  Congress can absolutely close holes left in the amendments or existing laws so long as they don't specifically run against an amendment or the original document. 
  • static111static111 Posts: 2,939
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
    What laws could stop another 1/6 if the existing laws didnt?  It's like our gun problem...more laws aren't going to solve anything.  We need a societal shift of some kind.
    I can't say I'm enough of an expert to know at this point, since we don't know what the core issue.  However, the Election law of 1877 could make 'more' clear that the VP has no power to reject any certified electors.  We could also clarify which electors would be accepted by the Congress, in the event that more than one set is submitted.  This was the crux of the plan by the most diabolical of his minions; to have the VP reject the certified electors and accept other ones.  And/or for the VP to reject them and immediately throw the election to the House.  Congress can absolutely close holes left in the amendments or existing laws so long as they don't specifically run against an amendment or the original document. 
    I thought we were talking about preventing the breaking into the capital aspect.  From a procedural standpoint what you presented makes perfect sense.  From an inflamed mob of people that will not stop at anything to get their guy in the white house even if it means overthrowing the government, not so much.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 23,275
    edited December 1
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
    What laws could stop another 1/6 if the existing laws didnt?  It's like our gun problem...more laws aren't going to solve anything.  We need a societal shift of some kind.
    I can't say I'm enough of an expert to know at this point, since we don't know what the core issue.  However, the Election law of 1877 could make 'more' clear that the VP has no power to reject any certified electors.  We could also clarify which electors would be accepted by the Congress, in the event that more than one set is submitted.  This was the crux of the plan by the most diabolical of his minions; to have the VP reject the certified electors and accept other ones.  And/or for the VP to reject them and immediately throw the election to the House.  Congress can absolutely close holes left in the amendments or existing laws so long as they don't specifically run against an amendment or the original document. 
    I thought we were talking about preventing the breaking into the capital aspect.  From a procedural standpoint what you presented makes perfect sense.  From an inflamed mob of people that will not stop at anything to get their guy in the white house even if it means overthrowing the government, not so much.
    Right, you can't legislate away a mob.  However, you can close some loops. Trump's strategy was two fold, incite the mob and have a plausibly legitimate way to retain power.  The committee has an important duty to close out any laws that could subvert our democracy.  
  • static111static111 Posts: 2,939
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    static111 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    dankind said:
    It doesn't matter how many eggs are cracked open, nothing will come of this whole fucking thing.

    It's a waste of taxpayer money to learn something that most of us already know.

    No one of any consequence will face any kind of punishment that fits their particular crime, and more taxpayer money will be wasted in this arena as well.

    The US is FUBAR!
    The point of of the committee is to create new laws to attempt to prevent such an issue from arising again.  If there was no desired legislative outcome, then congress loses its interest and therefore cannot enforce a subpoena.  
    What laws could stop another 1/6 if the existing laws didnt?  It's like our gun problem...more laws aren't going to solve anything.  We need a societal shift of some kind.
    I can't say I'm enough of an expert to know at this point, since we don't know what the core issue.  However, the Election law of 1877 could make 'more' clear that the VP has no power to reject any certified electors.  We could also clarify which electors would be accepted by the Congress, in the event that more than one set is submitted.  This was the crux of the plan by the most diabolical of his minions; to have the VP reject the certified electors and accept other ones.  And/or for the VP to reject them and immediately throw the election to the House.  Congress can absolutely close holes left in the amendments or existing laws so long as they don't specifically run against an amendment or the original document. 
    I thought we were talking about preventing the breaking into the capital aspect.  From a procedural standpoint what you presented makes perfect sense.  From an inflamed mob of people that will not stop at anything to get their guy in the white house even if it means overthrowing the government, not so much.
    Right, you can't legislate away a mob.  However, you can close some loops. Trump's strategy was two fold, incite the mob and have a plausibly legitimate way to retain power.  The committee has an important duty to close out any laws that could subvert our democracy.  
    Well lets hope they can get that done before the mid terms.
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 23,196
    News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents  https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/media-bannon-suit/2021/12/01/b3715c1a-52d8-11ec-9267-17ae3bde2f26_story.html 


     News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents
    By Paul Farhi and Elahe Izadi
    December 01 at 6:04 PM EST
    A coalition of news organizations, including The Washington Post, has sided with former Trump White House adviser Stephen K. Bannon in asking a federal court to release documents that are part of Bannon’s prosecution for refusing to testify before the Jan. 6 congressional committee.
    Bannon is fighting a proposal by prosecutors to keep the documents under wraps — including more than 1,000 pages of witness testimony, grand-jury proceedings and other information generated as part of the discovery process in the prosecution of Bannon for alleged contempt of Congress. Journalists would not be able to see the documents if the Justice Department prevails in persuading a judge to impose a protective order.
    The legal brief submitted by The Post, the New York Times, CNN, NBC News and others creates strange bedfellows. It aligns some of the biggest news organizations with one of their harshest critics.
    Bannon, who was chief executive of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and briefly Trump’s chief White House strategist, often amplified Trump’s criticism and contempt of the news media. At one point during his brief tenure at the White House, he called the media “the opposition party” and said it “should keep its mouth shut.”
    He pleaded not guilty last month to two counts of contempt of Congress. The charges stemmed from his refusal to testify and to turn over material subpoenaed by the Democratic-led House committee that is investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building.
    The government contends that public access to the documents would result in publicity that could taint the jury selection process and result in witness intimidation before the trial begins. Prosecutors have argued in a brief that Bannon’s public statements “make clear that defense’s real purpose [is] to abuse criminal discovery to try this case in the media rather than in court.”

    continues

    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    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
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 23,275
    mickeyrat said:
    News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents  https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/media-bannon-suit/2021/12/01/b3715c1a-52d8-11ec-9267-17ae3bde2f26_story.html 


     News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents
    By Paul Farhi and Elahe Izadi
    December 01 at 6:04 PM EST
    A coalition of news organizations, including The Washington Post, has sided with former Trump White House adviser Stephen K. Bannon in asking a federal court to release documents that are part of Bannon’s prosecution for refusing to testify before the Jan. 6 congressional committee.
    Bannon is fighting a proposal by prosecutors to keep the documents under wraps — including more than 1,000 pages of witness testimony, grand-jury proceedings and other information generated as part of the discovery process in the prosecution of Bannon for alleged contempt of Congress. Journalists would not be able to see the documents if the Justice Department prevails in persuading a judge to impose a protective order.
    The legal brief submitted by The Post, the New York Times, CNN, NBC News and others creates strange bedfellows. It aligns some of the biggest news organizations with one of their harshest critics.
    Bannon, who was chief executive of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and briefly Trump’s chief White House strategist, often amplified Trump’s criticism and contempt of the news media. At one point during his brief tenure at the White House, he called the media “the opposition party” and said it “should keep its mouth shut.”
    He pleaded not guilty last month to two counts of contempt of Congress. The charges stemmed from his refusal to testify and to turn over material subpoenaed by the Democratic-led House committee that is investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building.
    The government contends that public access to the documents would result in publicity that could taint the jury selection process and result in witness intimidation before the trial begins. Prosecutors have argued in a brief that Bannon’s public statements “make clear that defense’s real purpose [is] to abuse criminal discovery to try this case in the media rather than in court.”

    continues

    Yeah of course... they want stories.  But Justice is right.  Bannon wants to try this in the media, using his right wing channels to spread lies and disinformation.  Typical.  
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 29,155
    mrussel1 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents  https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/media-bannon-suit/2021/12/01/b3715c1a-52d8-11ec-9267-17ae3bde2f26_story.html 


     News organizations join Bannon’s battle to get Jan. 6 prosecution documents
    By Paul Farhi and Elahe Izadi
    December 01 at 6:04 PM EST
    A coalition of news organizations, including The Washington Post, has sided with former Trump White House adviser Stephen K. Bannon in asking a federal court to release documents that are part of Bannon’s prosecution for refusing to testify before the Jan. 6 congressional committee.
    Bannon is fighting a proposal by prosecutors to keep the documents under wraps — including more than 1,000 pages of witness testimony, grand-jury proceedings and other information generated as part of the discovery process in the prosecution of Bannon for alleged contempt of Congress. Journalists would not be able to see the documents if the Justice Department prevails in persuading a judge to impose a protective order.
    The legal brief submitted by The Post, the New York Times, CNN, NBC News and others creates strange bedfellows. It aligns some of the biggest news organizations with one of their harshest critics.
    Bannon, who was chief executive of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and briefly Trump’s chief White House strategist, often amplified Trump’s criticism and contempt of the news media. At one point during his brief tenure at the White House, he called the media “the opposition party” and said it “should keep its mouth shut.”
    He pleaded not guilty last month to two counts of contempt of Congress. The charges stemmed from his refusal to testify and to turn over material subpoenaed by the Democratic-led House committee that is investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol building.
    The government contends that public access to the documents would result in publicity that could taint the jury selection process and result in witness intimidation before the trial begins. Prosecutors have argued in a brief that Bannon’s public statements “make clear that defense’s real purpose [is] to abuse criminal discovery to try this case in the media rather than in court.”

    continues

    Yeah of course... they want stories.  But Justice is right.  Bannon wants to try this in the media, using his right wing channels to spread lies and disinformation.  Typical.  
    And pollute the potential jury pool. His whole trial and preliminary court hearings should be under a gag rule.
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA;

    "If you're looking down on someone, it better be to extend them a hand to lift them up."

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
Sign In or Register to comment.