'Does Anybody Have a Plan?' Senate Report Details Jan. 6 Security Failures.

  
Via:  Just Jim NC TttH  •  2 weeks ago  •  48 comments

By:   Luke Broadwater and Nicholas Fandos (MSN)

'Does Anybody Have a Plan?' Senate Report Details Jan. 6 Security Failures.
WASHINGTON — Top federal intelligence agencies failed to adequately warn law enforcement officials before the Jan. 6 riot that pro-Trump extremists were threatening violence, including plans to "storm the Capitol," infiltrate its tunnel system and "bring guns," according to a new report by two Senate committees that outlines large-scale failures that contributed to the deadly assault. An F.B.I. memo on Jan. 5 warning of people traveling to...

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

"What we have he-ah, is fayl-yuh ta commune cate."


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



WASHINGTON — Top federal intelligence agencies failed to adequately warn law enforcement officials before the Jan. 6 riot that pro-Trump extremists were threatening violence, including plans to "storm the Capitol," infiltrate its tunnel system and "bring guns," according to a new report by two Senate committees that outlines large-scale failures that contributed to the deadly assault.

An F.B.I. memo on Jan. 5 warning of people traveling to Washington for "war" at the Capitol never made its way to top law enforcement officials. The Capitol Police failed to widely circulate information from its intelligence unit that supporters of President Donald J. Trump were posting online about pressuring lawmakers to overturn his election loss.

"If they don't show up, we enter the Capitol as the Third Continental Congress and certify the Trump Electors," one post said.

"Bring guns. It's now or never," said another.

The first congressional report on the Capitol riot is the most comprehensive and detailed account of the dozens of intelligence failures, miscommunications and security lapses that led to what the bipartisan team of senators that assembled it concluded was an "unprecedented attack" on American democracy and the most significant assault on the Capitol in more than 200 years.

"The failure to adequately assess the threat of violence on that day contributed significantly to the breach of the Capitol," said Senator Gary Peters, Democrat of Michigan and the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. "The attack was quite frankly planned in plain sight."

The 127-page joint report, a product of more than three months of hearings and interviews and reviews of thousands of pages of documents, presents a damning portrait of the preparations and response at multiple levels. Law enforcement officials did not take seriously threats of violence, it found, and a dysfunctional police force at the Capitol lacked the capacity to respond effectively when those threats materialized.

"The failures are obvious," said Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota and the chairwoman of the Rules and Administration Committee. "To me, it was all summed up by one of the officers who was heard on the radio that day asking a tragically simple question: 'Does anybody have a plan?' Sadly, no one did."

In response to the report, the Capitol Police said in a statement that its leaders agreed that the force needed improvement, including changing the way it collects and shares intelligence. But it insisted that law enforcement officials had no way of knowing that a pro-Trump rally would turn into a mass assault.

"Before Jan. 6, the Capitol Police leadership knew Congress and the Capitol grounds were to be the focus of a large demonstration attracting various groups, including some encouraging violence," the statement said. But, it added, "neither the U.S.C.P., nor the F.B.I., U.S. Secret Service, Metropolitan Police or our other law enforcement partners knew thousands of rioters were planning to attack the U.S. Capitol. The known intelligence simply didn't support that conclusion."

The report is the product collaboration among Mr. Peters, Ms. Klobuchar and the top Republicans on the two committees they lead: Senator Rob Portman of Ohio on the Homeland Security Committee and Roy Blunt of Missouri on the Rules Committee. It is limited by its bipartisan nature, given that Republicans have refused to ask questions about the riot as they try to put its political implications behind them before the 2022 midterm elections.

Though the report states flatly that Mr. Trump "continued to assert that the election was stolen from him" and promoted the "Stop the Steal" gathering in Washington before the riot, it does not chart his actions or motivations, state that his election claims were false or explore the implications of a president and leading politicians in his party stoking outrage among millions of supporters.

The inquiry does not describe the events of Jan. 6 as an "insurrection," a term many Republicans had joined Democrats in embracing immediately after the attack. Aides involved in its drafting said they had refrained from trying to summarize or contextualize Mr. Trump's false claims just before the riot took place. They opted instead to include the full text of his speech in an appendix.

Many of the findings in the report were culled from public testimony from committee hearings, though five people sat for detailed interviews with the committee: Christopher C. Miller, who was the acting defense secretary; Ryan D. McCarthy, the Army secretary; Gen. James C. McConville, the Army chief of staff; Yogananda D. Pittman, the acting chief of the Capitol Police; and J​. Brett Blanton, the architect of the Capitol.

The committee staff solicited more than 50 statements from Capitol Police officers that painted a vivid portrayal of the rioters, some of whom gave Nazi salutes and hurled racist slurs at them. One officer described being crushed by the mob. Another told the committee that she still suffered from chemical burns she experienced that day.

About 140 law enforcement officers reported injuries from the riot. The bipartisan report also tied seven fatalities to the assault, including five protesters who died and three police officers who died in its aftermath, two from suicide.

The document lays out profound problems with the Capitol Police special unit that handles civil disturbances, only a fraction of which was adequately trained to respond to a riot, and which was poorly equipped. On Jan. 6, its officers were not authorized to wear protective gear at the beginning of their shifts or to use their most powerful nonlethal weapons — such as grenade launchers and sting ball grenades — to push back crowds, because they lacked the training to do so.

"Let's be honest: Capitol Police were put in an impossible situation," Mr. Portman said. "Without adequate intelligence, training and equipment, they did not have the tools to protect the Capitol."

The committees recommended 20 improvements, like beefing up police training and equipment and forming a single intelligence bureau in the Capitol Police to better share information. Their suggestions followed those from Lt. Gen. Russel L. Honore, a retired Army officer whom Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California chose to lead a House task force that recommended the hiring of more than 800 Capitol Police officers, the construction of mobile fencing around the complex and changes to Capitol Police Board procedures to allow the agency's chief to quickly summon the National Guard in an emergency.

Mr. Blunt said that he and Ms. Klobuchar would soon introduce legislation to grant the Capitol Police chief power to unilaterally summon the National Guard in emergencies. He said they were also likely to assemble a spending bill to increase funding for the department and carry out other changes.

There was much information the panel was unable to learn. The senators secured only limited cooperation from key agencies, including the F.B.I., the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the House sergeant-at-arms. Other agencies failed to meet deadlines to hand over documents.

The findings — and their limitations — are likely to fuel renewed calls for an independent commission like the one created after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, populated by experts and armed with subpoena power to investigate what happened that day and why. Senate Republicans blocked the creation of such a body late last month, arguing in part that it would duplicate the work already underway by the Senate committees and prosecutors at the Justice Department.

"This report is important in that it allows us to make some immediate improvements," Mr. Peters said. "But it does not answer some of the bigger questions that we need to face, quite frankly, as a country and a democracy."

It does, however, offer a detailed accounting of more than a dozen intelligence failures.

"Neither the F.B.I. nor D.H.S. deemed online posts calling for violence at the Capitol as credible," the report states.

It faults the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Intelligence and Analysis for issuing "no intelligence products specific to Jan. 6" while it issued 15 other documents on unrelated domestic extremism without "any mention of the joint session of Congress or the Capitol."

The report also describes the "absolutely brutal" abuse of the Capitol Police, which employs more than 1,800 sworn officers and whose $500 million budget exceeds that of the police forces in Detroit, Minneapolis and St. Louis.

"At one point, I was pushed so hard and crushed in between people that I could not breathe," one officer reported.

"I specifically remember being sprayed with bear spray at least six to eight times while tussling with rioters who were trying to use the bike racks against us as weapons," another told the committee.

Many questions remain unanswered, ranging from the criminal — such as who was responsible for the pipe bombs that were placed outside the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican National Committees — to the strategic: Is law enforcement doing enough to combat right-wing extremism?

The senators said they planned to press on with their investigation.

"The American people certainly do deserve to get all the facts about this attack," Mr. Peters said.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH    2 weeks ago
"Is law enforcement doing enough to combat right-wing extremism?"

Evidently as much as they are combatting left-wing extremism. 

Except for the pipe bomb thing, looks like the Senate did the investigating already and the need for a commission is a wasted effort. As stated in another place and time, just what is it they are hoping to find in addition to a bunch of morons storming the Capital compound? Seems the $500 million budget is a bit of overkill considering the basic seemingly incompetent "bang for the buck".

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1    2 weeks ago

What left-wing extremism?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

You just want them to sweep trump's mob insurrection under the rug eh?

Not gonna happen!

We'll find out that trump and his mob had a lot of inside help!  Which is why the majority of the republicans want it swept under the rug.  Those who are against the commission are complicit in 1/6/21, I GUARANTEE IT!

You were correct about one thing Jim, trump and his mob were morons, you NEED to add domestic terrorists to that.  They are right wing domestic terrorist morons.  

YOU'RE WELCOME!

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Masters Expert
3  Greg Jones    2 weeks ago

It didn't rise to the level of an insurrection. A biased and partisan left wing commission wouldn't find anything that we don't already know...that the Biden administration failed miserably when it came to protecting the Capitol.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1  Snuffy  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago
that the Biden administration failed miserably when it came to protecting the Capitol.

Actually the Trump administration was still in charge then. But Capitol security falls under which office?  Isn't Congress in charge of Capitol Police?  There were plenty of failures all down the line by several players in both information and threat-level sharing as well has preparations. For too long the Capital has been very open as "The People's House" and building security has been ignored for a major part. 

A biased and partisan left wing commission wouldn't find anything that we don't already know

It seems very obvious to me that the push for this investigation commission is really nothing more than another attempt by the Democrats to attack Trump in the hopes of getting something more to stick in order to keep him from running in 2024.  While I hope he doesn't run, this just seems to be to be just another bite at the apple.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
3.1.1  evilgenius  replied to  Snuffy @3.1    2 weeks ago
There were plenty of failures all down the line by several players in both information and threat-level sharing as well has preparations.

Which is why I'd like a comprehensive public investigation. Something NOT done by Congress. We'll never get it and the Republicans just want it all to go away so we won't get a bi-partisan commission either.

It seems very obvious to me that the push for this investigation commission is really nothing more than another attempt by the Democrats to attack Trump...

Perhaps, but I think it's more about attacking the Trump's support in Congress. Gaetz, Brookes and Greene are the most likely candidates. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  evilgenius @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
Which is why I'd like a comprehensive public investigation. Something NOT done by Congress. We'll never get it and the Republicans just want it all to go away so we won't get a bi-partisan commission either.

Seems to me that law enforcement (FBI, Capital Police among others) is doing investigations as somewhere around 400 people have been arrested and charged.  And the report that recently came out showed areas where improvement is needed. Capital Police need to change policies and training, the Capital building needs security improvements, etc.  So there is already a lot of investigation and review that is occurring. I definitely want to keep politics out of that mix, allowing politics in would only screw up the works.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
3.1.3  evilgenius  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.2    2 weeks ago
Seems to me that law enforcement (FBI, Capital Police among others) is doing investigations as somewhere around 400 people have been arrested and charged. 

It's being run by the DoJ and it's up over 500 people at present.

And the report that recently came out showed areas where improvement is needed.

I didn't read that. I'll have to go look at it. You wouldn't happen to have a link? If not I'm sure I'll find it.

I definitely want to keep politics out of that mix, allowing politics in would only screw up the works.

As would I. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.4  Snuffy  replied to  evilgenius @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
I didn't read that. I'll have to go look at it. You wouldn't happen to have a link? If not I'm sure I'll find it.

This is the best link I could find.  It's more a summary but at the bottom are links to the full report as well as a link to the summary and recommendations.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
3.1.5  evilgenius  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.4    2 weeks ago

Thanks! I'll try to get to it today, but people keep putting applications on my desk... it's supposed to be our slow time! 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.2    2 weeks ago
I definitely want to keep politics out of that mix, allowing politics in would only screw up the works.

The predicate and the events on Jan. 6 were purely political. If ANY elected officials used their office to add and abet the insurrectionist, they need to be prosecuted. Who the hell will we know whether that happened unless a commission is seated and given subpoena power? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.6    2 weeks ago

What exactly do you think the DOJ is doing in regards to investigating the event??

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.8  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.7    2 weeks ago
What exactly do you think the DOJ is doing in regards to investigating the event??

All I can use to judge that is what the DOJ is stating in indictments.

I have yet to see one indictment that even implies that they investigated Capitol Hill visitors logs or that they have subpoenaed Rep's or Senator's phone logs or that they have questioned them about their communications or actions before and during Jan. 6th.

It's seems clear to me that those in Congress like McCarthy, Boebert, Tuberville and Lee are doing everything in their power to avoid scrutiny. They all could have and should have been interviewed and deposed long ago. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

Well, gee, you should address your grave concerns to the director of the FBI or the head of the DOJ.

I am positive they will view their investigation in a whole new light armed with the knowledge you provide.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.9    2 weeks ago
Well, gee, you should address your grave concerns to the director of the FBI or the head of the DOJ.

Where the fuck did I had any 'grave concerns' Tex. I merely replied to your question with a cogent answer. 

I am positive they will view their investigation in a whole new light armed with the knowledge you provide.

You are often positive about things you do not know. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
Where the fuck did I had any 'grave concerns' Tex.

So you aren't so concerned about it. Got it. No big deal either way, but I am sure it will remain an issue.

You are often positive about things you do not know.

yeah, maybe, but I balance it out with being positive about things I do know--like this.

 
 
 
bugsy
PhD Guide
3.1.12  bugsy  replied to  Dulay @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
I merely replied to your question with a cogent answer. 

Only i the eyes of those that think they did.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.13  Texan1211  replied to  bugsy @3.1.12    2 weeks ago

Some tend to think they are the only ones capable of writing cogently.

I like to call those folks deluded whack-a-doodles!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.14  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.11    2 weeks ago
So you aren't so concerned about it. Got it. No big deal either way, but I am sure it will remain an issue.

Again, where did I say I'm not concerned. 

Perhaps you should let my actual words speak for themselves than offering up your bias misinterpretation. 

yeah, maybe, but I balance it out with being positive about things I do know--like this.

Are you relying on your magic 8 ball or just pulling it out of your nether regions Tex? 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.15  Dulay  replied to  bugsy @3.1.12    2 weeks ago
Only i the eyes of those that think they did.

WTF are you babbling about bugsy? 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.16  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.13    2 weeks ago
Some tend to think they are the only ones capable of writing cogently. I like to call those folks deluded whack-a-doodles!

Some tend to hid behind other members to post snarky bullshit. I call those folks cowards. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.14    2 weeks ago
Again, where did I say I'm not concerned. 

Read carefully. I didn't say what you are now claiming. It is right there in my post-just look at it.

For once.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.18  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.16    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.19  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.17    2 weeks ago
YOU: So you aren't so concerned about it. Me: Again, where did I say I'm not concerned. 

Yep. YOU said that. 

Oh and where the fuck did I had any 'grave concerns' Tex? 

Hint: NOWHERE. 

I didn't say what you have been claiming. It is right there in my post, just READ it and reply to it cogently.

For once.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.19    2 weeks ago

Can you NOT see the word "so" in my post?

Now, what do you think that means?

I am sorry that English is so perplexing for you.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.21  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.20    2 weeks ago
Can you NOT see the word "so" in my post?

I see 'so' in your post Tex. 

Now, what do you think that means?

In that sentence it's a conjecture. In English grammar it infers that you arrived at conclusion by surmise or guesswork.

I am sorry that English is so perplexing for you.

Why create a fantasy to be sorry about Tex? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @3.1.8    2 weeks ago
"What exactly do you think the DOJ is doing in regards to investigating the event??"
"All I can use to judge that is what the DOJ is stating in indictments.

I have yet to see one indictment that even implies that they investigated Capitol Hill visitors logs or that they have subpoenaed Rep's or Senator's phone logs or that they have questioned them about their communications or actions before and during Jan. 6th.

It's seems clear to me that those in Congress like McCarthy, Boebert, Tuberville and Lee are doing everything in their power to avoid scrutiny. They all could have and should have been interviewed and deposed long ago."

Some of the gqp members like Boebert  had guided tours at the Capitol just days before the trumpmob failed coup.  Those who don't want a commission are complicit.  NO DOUBT ABOUT IT WHATSOEVER.  Boebert even announced during the trumpmob failed coup where Ms. Pelosi and I believe Ms. Ocasio-Cortez were located.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.23  Tessylo  replied to  Dulay @3.1.15    2 weeks ago

It seems Tex has a cheerleader!  Rah Rah Bug!

 
 
 
bugsy
PhD Guide
3.1.24  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.13    2 weeks ago
I like to call those folks deluded whack-a-doodles!

I like to call them narcissist.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.21    2 weeks ago

Your total lack of comprehension is truly amazing to witness.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.26  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.25    2 weeks ago

Believe whatever makes you feel better Tex. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.27  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.26    2 weeks ago

Believing the truth works quite well for me.

Thanks for your permission to believe as I wish, though.

Now I can rest easy knowing I have permission from an anonymous person on the internet.

Whew!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.28  Dulay  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.27    2 weeks ago
Believing the truth works quite well for me.

Except the truth that 'so' is a conjecture it seems. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.29  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @3.1.28    2 weeks ago

Like I give a shit what anything "seems" like to you.

Please.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
3.2  evilgenius  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago
It didn't rise to the level of an insurrection.

Your opinion.

A biased and partisan left wing commission wouldn't find anything that we don't already know...

If Republicans could ever pull their heads from their asses they could work to form a bi-partisian commission. Remind me how many Benghazi investigations there were again? 13 wasn't it? 

...the Biden administration failed miserably when it came to protecting the Capitol.

Is this one of those "alternative facts"? In reality where everyone else lives Biden didn't take charge until 14 days later. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
3.2.1  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  evilgenius @3.2    2 weeks ago
If Republicans could ever pull their heads from their asses they could work to form a bi-partisian commission.

To what end? What do they expect/need to "find". Pretty damned obvious what happened. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Participates
3.2.2  evilgenius  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.2.1    2 weeks ago
To what end?

To keep the Democrats honest as to whatever any "findings" may, or may not, be. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.3  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @3.2    2 weeks ago
"Is this one of those "alternative facts"? In reality where everyone else lives Biden didn't take charge until 14 days later."

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.2.1    2 weeks ago
"Pretty damned obvious what happened."

Yes, a failed coup/insurrection led/fueled/incited/invited by #45

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.2.5  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.2.1    2 weeks ago

How about whether GOP House members gave insurrectionists tours at the Capitol?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.4    2 weeks ago

So why again hasn't Trump been charged with anything?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago
A biased and partisan left wing commission wouldn't find anything that we don't already know...that the Biden administration failed miserably when it came to protecting the Capitol.

I'm surprised you didnt delete that as soon as you saw it in black and white. People usually delete such ridiculous comments if they can. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.4  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago

"that the Biden administration failed miserably when it came to protecting the Capitol."

So President Biden was supposed to be protecting the Capitol while whatshisname was 'president'?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.5  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @3    2 weeks ago

Of course it was an insurrection, a failed coup.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4  Tessylo    2 weeks ago

Busted: GOP officials confronted with evidence of MAGA riot lies

Mon, June 7, 2021, 7:27 PM

A growing number of Republican members of Congress are minimizing, dissembling, and lying about the January 6th insurrection. This fact-check by MSNBC's Chief Legal Correspondent Ari Melber confronts recent statements by those officials with the factual record, documenting 10 key examples of the Orwellian effort to deny the reality of the insurrection, and debunking each one with documentary footage, evidence from legal cases, and independent reporting.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

Very typical of the Trumpsuckers - put the blame on security failures instead of the incitement to insurrection.  Wasn't it Lincoln who said that “You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”  So try hard Trumpsuckers, in America you might succeed. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
5.1  Snuffy  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5    2 weeks ago

The bi-panel that did this investigation and released the report mentioned in this seed were only looking security, planning and response failures by law enforcement. There are more investigations occurring over in the House. For myself I'm concerned that these are being driving more for partisan reasons than actually finding and fixing flaws. Neither political party is driving by their better angels to better the lives of the American people, partisan politics drive the action because there is so much money involved in this. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Snuffy @5.1    2 weeks ago

jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif I'm sure you're so concerned about there being so much money involved in this!!!!!!!!

Were you this concerned over the Benghazi investigations??????????????????????????????

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



pat wilson
Hallux
zuksam
JohnRussell
Gazoo
lady in black
Mark in Wyoming


50 visitors