Hasan trial judge: Prosecutors barred from mentioning “jihad” motive

posted at 12:01 pm on August 20, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Prosecutors will not be allowed to enter evidence that Nidal Hasan intended to commit jihad in his mass murder spree at Fort Hood nearly four years ago, the judge in the court-martial ruled yesterday.  Col. Tara Osborn also struck from evidence the correspondence between Hasan and al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki, although she did allow prosecutors to use records of Hasan’s Internet usage and search histories at the time of the shooting:

Lawyers representing the family members of those killed and injured in the Ft. Hood shooting rampage were outraged today when an Army judge limited prosecutors from introducing evidence, including emails to a known Al Qaeda operative, that would establish accused shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan’s “jihadi” motives. …

Prosecutors have sought to portray Hasan as a Muslim extremist, motivated by Islamist ideology and in touch with known al Qaeda member Anwar Alwaki.

“He didn’t want to deploy and he came to believe he had a jihad duty to murder soldiers,” lead prosecutor Col. Steve Henricks said in his opening statements. He wanted to “kill as many soldiers as he could.”

The judge, Col. Tara Osborn, ruled today that prosecutors could not mention Hasan’s correspondence with Alwaki, an American born al Qaeda recruiter and organizer. Osborn also barred prosecutors from mentioning Hassan’s interest in seeking conscientious objector status and drawing parallels to a 2003 incident in which another Muslim American soldier attacked U.S. troops in Kuwait, according to the Associated Press.

The judge found much of that evidence was too old, but permitted prosecutors to introduce evidence about Hasan’s internet usage and search history from the time of the attack.

This won’t hamper prosecutors at all, since Hasan admitted to the murders in his opening statement.  The charges do not include terrorism, thanks to its lack of inclusion in the UCMJ, but the murder charges carry the death penalty anyway.

The real damage in this ruling is to the survivors and the families of the deceased.  They want to pursue civil litigation against Hasan, and against the Obama administration’s designation of the attack as “workplace violence.” Lawsuits will force the Department of Defense to answer for that decision, which keeps the dead and wounded from being recognized as victims of a terrorist attack.  An attorney representing the families expressed his outrage yesterday, saying that the evidence of Hasan’s motives should have been allowed as they would in any first-degree murder trial.

Perhaps they may get their wish anyway.  Hasan will shortly open his defense, and while most predict he won’t do much during the trial phase, he may be saving it for the sentencing hearing:

In a rare move, Hasan began this week by challenging the government’s definition of “jihad” and — for the first time since the day that testimony began — questioned a witness. …

Hasan briefly cross-examined Staff Sgt. Juan Alvarado, who saw a gunfight between Hasan and Kimberly Munley, one of the Fort Hood police officers who responded to the shootings. Alvarado said Hasan tried to shoot Munley after she had been shot and disarmed.

“Are you saying — and I don’t want to put words in your mouth — are you saying that after it was clear that she was disarmed, I continued to fire at her?” Hasan asked.

Alvarado said that was correct.

If the impression one gets is that this wasn’t a particularly helpful cross-examination for the defense, one would be correct — but only if one assumes that the defense wants to beat the rap.  Hasan wants to turn the court-martial into a platform for his jihad, and the most likely place for that to occur will be after the formal end of the defense at the closing, when Hasan can offer lengthy argument, or during sentencing. The survivors and families of the deceased will likely get a trove of on-the-record statements from Hasan that will more than suffice for their lawsuits.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Worthless judge.

bluegill on August 20, 2013 at 12:03 PM

Workplace violence. What a joke. I can’t stand this PC/Lying crap. How did we let this happen??

Deano1952 on August 20, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Um, that was his motive. That’s a key part of a prosecution is giving motive. This is inane.

anotherJoe on August 20, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Awful lot of pressure on that judge to ignore the elephant in the room. And much like the IRS scandal, there doesn’t need to be a spoken conspiracy.

rbj on August 20, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Because the evidence is too old? Wait…what? The colonel must be a moron.

Still, if Hasan gets the death penalty you should quickly open a kiosk or two in large liberal cities selling black armbands, you’ll make a fortune.

Bishop on August 20, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Hasan trial judge: Prosecutors barred from mentioning “jihad” motive

Everyone knows that it was just workplace violence. No jihadi connection. Maybe a postal connection, though. “Allahu ackbar” is often said by employees going postal. It’s a fact.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 20, 2013 at 12:09 PM

The real damage in this ruling is to the survivors and the families of the deceased. They want to pursue civil litigation against Hasan, and against the Obama administration’s designation of the attack as “workplace violence.”

Is there precedence for a Military trial to be utilized in a civil lawsuit, of which evidence not allowed, is in fact allowed?

I ask because while the Judge may not allow his links to jihadists, phone calls etc – it doesn’t omit a civil trial bringing it up, or does it?

The burden of proof is far less in civil and military law is not the same as traditional law.

Odie1941 on August 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM

So the president can drone-kill Al Awaki because of interactions he had with Hasan, but those interactions can’t be mentioned in Hasan’s trial?

MayBee on August 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM

He was upset about a Youtube video..

Little Boomer on August 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Is it really about NOT paying families BENEFITS? Or is it about NOT having to say we had a terrorist attack on our soil?

originalpechanga on August 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Probably won’t matter anyway. Hassan is defending himself so he’ll most likely mention it himself. After all his aim is martyrdom. Can’t get that if you ain’t a jihadi.

Oldnuke on August 20, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Charlie Foxtrot, writ large……

ted c on August 20, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Well, having “soldier of Allah” printed on his business card should be enough of a clue judge.

can_con on August 20, 2013 at 12:12 PM

thanks big sis for workplace violence

cmsinaz on August 20, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Probably won’t matter anyway. Hassan is defending himself so he’ll most likely mention it himself.

Oldnuke on August 20, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Then the judge will declare a mistrial and release him. After all, according to Army Chief of Staff, Casey, at the time:

“As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well.”

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August 20, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Aren’t all military combat casualties “workplace violence?”

myiq2xu on August 20, 2013 at 12:13 PM

What does the NSA and the IRS have on the trial judge?

JimK on August 20, 2013 at 12:15 PM

There is already ample evidence that this was not a matter of ‘workplace violence’. The Obama administration is going to be haunted by the decision to ignore the evidence and designate this atrocity a ‘workplace violence’ event and their motives for refusing to admit that the Fort Hood shooting was an act of terrorism committed against US military personnel by a jihadist on US soil who had infiltrated the US military will be examined at length in due course. That this judge is eager to take her cues from the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces is so surprise.

The truth will out and justice will not be denied. All that remains to be seen is how long this administration can avoid being held accountable for its evident failings and extreme overreach.

thatsafactjack on August 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM

On what basis did the judge exclude this?

Was it a defense objection?

Everything I know about court I learned on Law and Order…so, I’d love to have some real insight from someone who knows what She’s talking about.

questionmark on August 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Sorry…. should be ….no surprise…not so surprise.

thatsafactjack on August 20, 2013 at 12:19 PM

I need someone smart like RWM to explain this, because my first reaction towards this judge is neither kind, nor complimentary.

Midas on August 20, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Does the military still use firing squads?

Rovin on August 20, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I hate Politically Correctness.

kirkill on August 20, 2013 at 12:21 PM

and Political Correctness.

kirkill on August 20, 2013 at 12:21 PM

With the military limitations on conducting a murder trial can the victims ever get justice here? It does not look like it.

The military needs to purge itself from all those likely to commit ‘workplace violence’. And give each one a pork steak on the way out.

TerryW on August 20, 2013 at 12:23 PM

Does the judge share that general’s same concern that the real tragedy here would be if “diversity” in the armed forces were harmed by this incident?

gwelf on August 20, 2013 at 12:24 PM

What a waste of time and energy with this guy.
How long does it take to prosecute this scumbag ?
Sounds like the case is more concerned about religion and motive than evidence.
.
Who the freak cares why he did it.
He killed 13 people- Case should be closed, pdq.
.
Why is anyone still talking about this ahole?

FlaMurph on August 20, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Another man-caused disaster, eh? /

I’m gonna hit something, then hurl…and then weep for our nation.

Freakin’ poltically correct dhimmi Liberal pantywaist girlie-men traitorous moronic naive self-loathing ignorantjackwagonslike this judge are going to be the death of us all.

God protect us.

kingsjester on August 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Seems a competent prosecutor (Perry Mason-like) could provoke the defendant to spout his jihadi motives.

socalcon on August 20, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Breaking News
Obama appoints judge to Joint Chiefs

philw1776 on August 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Hasan wants to turn the court-martial into a platform for his jihad, and the most likely place for that to occur will be after the formal end of the defense at the closing, when Hasan can offer lengthy argument, or during sentencing. The survivors and families of the deceased will likely get a trove of on-the-record statements from Hasan that will more than suffice for their lawsuits.

Isn’t it a shame what these victims and their families have to go through just because a thin-skinned bastard maintains that there has been no domestic terror attack since the 9/11/01 atrocities. Maybe Hasan should start his defense with a shout out to his buddy arry.

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM

So the prosecution can say he did it, but not why he did it.

Bizarro world.

Bitter Clinger on August 20, 2013 at 12:29 PM

If there’s one thing our government seems to be good at these days, it’s providing cover for Islamic terrorists, at the expense of the families of their victims.

Bruce MacMahon on August 20, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Probably won’t matter anyway. Hassan is defending himself so he’ll most likely mention it himself.

Oldnuke on August 20, 2013 at 12:11 PM

Then the judge will declare a mistrial and release him. After all, according to Army Chief of Staff, Casey, at the time:

“As great a tragedy as this was, it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well.”

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on August

Thank you for this post! Most folks forgot about Casey and the President, cautioning everyone not to jump to conclusions with regard to this jihadist attack! To call this a disgrace is an understatement. The entire DOD and Executive Branch are guilty of misleading and lying to the public about this and Benghazi!

tomshup on August 20, 2013 at 12:31 PM

They’d sooner have us believe the mess hall was out of caramel latte k-cups and he just snapped.

Bruce MacMahon on August 20, 2013 at 12:32 PM

PC will kill the judge too, as it will kill all…just a matter of time.

The wild ones already won. This aministration has furthered them beyond even the wild ones’ imagination.

Schadenfreude on August 20, 2013 at 12:34 PM

It appears that the military has taken their lead from Obama and are in a state of reversible denial.

rplat on August 20, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Even though in his opening statements Hassan credited jihad as his motivation?

Hassan opened the door…to prevent the prosecution from walking through that same door may be grounds for a mistrial.

Or is this Fort Hood trial just about “workplace violence” and nothing more?

coldwarrior on August 20, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Pathetic.

Jack_Burton on August 20, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Thank you for this post! Most folks forgot about Casey and the President, cautioning everyone not to jump to conclusions with regard to this jihadist attack!

tomshup on August 20, 2013 at 12:31 PM

It was an absurd overly PC statement even when Casey made it. We knew even before the rat-eared wonder made that speech that started with an unrelated shout out that Hasan was screaming Alahu Akbar when he killed 14 and injured over 30. In short, this was a known terror attack from the beginning and it is only because of personal pride that the thin-skinned bastard is denying those victims benefits they are due.

In related military news, Bradley Manning’s defense team want a 25-year sentence. The prosecution sixty years. I don’t get why life without possibility of parole isn’t an option.

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2013 at 12:37 PM

We’re supposedly at war but we’re not allowed to identify the enemy or his motives. Smart Power indeed.

Flange on August 20, 2013 at 12:37 PM

This is “workplace violence” but Zimmerman defending himself against Martin is being investigated as a federal hate crime?

/Orwell would reject this as a storyline as too implausible

Paul-Cincy on August 20, 2013 at 12:38 PM

I hope Texas is saving a few lethal doses for this POS.

Although a firing squad would be rather apropos.

pain train on August 20, 2013 at 12:38 PM

Is it really about NOT paying families BENEFITS? Or is it about NOT having to say we had a terrorist attack on our soil?
originalpechanga on August 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM

It’s about kissing Islam’s collective arse.

Mohammed never existed, just wanted to throw that in. It was all made up as they went along, so that if a Caliph wanted to bugger boys he “found” a Hadith that showed Mohammed fondling and kissing boys. Etc.

I highly recommend Did Mohammed Exist? by Spencer.

Akzed on August 20, 2013 at 12:40 PM

We’re supposedly at war but we’re not allowed to identify the enemy or his motives. Smart Power indeed.

Flange on August 20, 2013 at 12:37 PM

It’s the religion of the enemy. Were the Fort Hood shooting done by a fundamentalist CHRISTIAN it would be a totally different story.

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2013 at 12:40 PM

The Judge is not impartial. He is protecting Islam. That is not his job.

pat on August 20, 2013 at 12:41 PM

Maybe someone could “inform” this Judge that the defendant
has ALREADY stated this was the reason?

ToddPA on August 20, 2013 at 12:41 PM

So, this is “workplace violence” simply for the history books?

/disgusting!

Paul-Cincy on August 20, 2013 at 12:41 PM

This ruling makes no sense. My guess is she was leaned on by Higher Higher

Wood Dragon on August 20, 2013 at 12:42 PM

I agree with the judge.

Blake on August 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Were the Fort Hood shooting done by a fundamentalist CHRISTIAN it would be a totally different story.

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2013 at 12:40 PM

If a white person killed 13 blacks while screaming “white power” and then later said he was working to keep the white race pure … do you suppose Obama would call that “workplace violence”?

Paul-Cincy on August 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM

But can’t the prosecution simply ask each witness what he/she heard Hasan scream?

txhsmom on August 20, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Allen West tweeted this out yesterday afternoon in regards to this trial;

Why hasn’t Hasan been charged w/ treason like Manning? R invisible hands involved in this case letting political correctness trump justice?

At least someone of some importance and with knowledge is speaking out. This is PC run amok in the military, sad days folks!

D-fusit on August 20, 2013 at 12:45 PM

I hope Texas is saving a few lethal doses for this POS.

Although a firing squad would be rather apropos.

pain train on August 20, 2013 at 12:38 PM

It’s a federal — not state case. Unfortunately, the feds are pathetic when it comes to carrying out death sentences. Hell, they can’t even convince juries to come back with a death sentence. If they do recommend death in this case, unless Hassan pulls a McVeigh and waives all appeals after his direct appeal, I wouldn’t expect to see him executed.

Blake on August 20, 2013 at 12:46 PM

The wild ones already won. This aministration has furthered them beyond even the wild ones’ imagination. Schadenfreude on August 20, 2013 at 12:34 PM

The Great Purge is coming, my friend.

Akzed on August 20, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I guess I’m silly and old fashioned. I thought the goal of a trial was to get at the truth…

redshirt on August 20, 2013 at 12:47 PM

I agree with the judge.

Blake on August 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Why?

Bitter Clinger on August 20, 2013 at 12:48 PM

If a white person killed 13 blacks while screaming “white power” and then later said he was working to keep the white race pure … do you suppose Obama would call that “workplace violence”?

Paul-Cincy on August 20, 2013 at 12:44 PM

To answer my own rhetorical question (ha!), Obama would say “it could have been me”.

Paul-Cincy on August 20, 2013 at 12:48 PM

Happy Nomad on August 20, 2013 at 12:40 PM

There’s no doubt about that, but the bigger problem I have is the curtailing of freedoms because “we are at war”, yet we can’t name the enemy or his motives. No amount of domestic surveillance will help in the war against islam until we admit it’s muslims we’re fighting.

Flange on August 20, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Notice that US MSM won’t say Jihad, nor will they report that these three: Chancey Luna, James Edwards and Michael Jones are black and shot an Australian for kicks.

It’s actually hard to find the names of the three in US media, have to go to the UK, Australia, or pretty much anywhere outside of the US.

Rode Werk on August 20, 2013 at 12:53 PM

This ruling makes no sense. My guess is she was leaned on by Higher Higher

Wood Dragon on August 20, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Then the colonel has forsaken her oath and is a star-hunter which makes her unacceptable, worthless, and a liability for the defense of this nation.

Bishop on August 20, 2013 at 12:54 PM

The prosecutor should wait until Hassan is on the record admitting to all of the deaths and wounded, then move the question of summary judgement based on the confession.

BobMbx on August 20, 2013 at 12:55 PM

Nothing like sitting on a military court martial for four years and then telling the defense that their evidence is too old to be admissible.

The Schaef on August 20, 2013 at 1:00 PM

You will not be allowed to consider evidence that confessed traitor is a traitor.

agmartin on August 20, 2013 at 1:00 PM

*correction* the prosecution.

Sorry.

The Schaef on August 20, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Well in other news, Brianna Manning will learn his fate tomorrow at 10 AM according to the judge in that case. The defense wants no more than 25 yrs., while the prosecutor asked for 60 yrs. Judge; please bring the hammer on his little traitorous butt.

D-fusit on August 20, 2013 at 1:02 PM

BREAKING:

Un-named WH source leaks memo suggesting full Presidential pardon for Hassan in trade for Iranian public announcement of nuclear progam reductions

BobMbx on August 20, 2013 at 1:03 PM

What does the NSA and the IRS have on the trial judge?

JimK on August 20, 2013 at 12:15 PM

In Obama’s fascist America, they don’t have to have anything. The judge only has to plausibly fear that they do know everything about him and his family and will use that information ruthlessly.

We should all take note.

slickwillie2001 on August 20, 2013 at 1:07 PM

The judge must be an Obama operative and fan of the Muslim Brotherhood…

albill on August 20, 2013 at 1:15 PM

Because the evidence is too old? Wait…what? The colonel must be a moron.

Still, if Hasan gets the death penalty you should quickly open a kiosk or two in large liberal cities selling black armbands, you’ll make a fortune.

Bishop on August 20, 2013 at 12:09 PM

She should be drummed out of the military in disgrace.

The judge must be an Obama operative and fan of the Muslim Brotherhood…

albill on August 20, 2013 at 1:15 PM

It would seem so. But Hassan will talk all about jihad so it doesn’t matter. She can’t stop Hasan from sticking his thumb in Obama’s eye.

dogsoldier on August 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM

The jury/panel will convict, the judge will overturn the verdict, proclaiming that Hasan is a victim of a hostile work environment, and will have his rank, pay, and privileges restored. The President will name him as his personal envoy to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Personnel retention within the DoD will plummet.
And the Statue of Justice will weep.

Another Drew on August 20, 2013 at 1:51 PM

On what basis did the judge exclude this?

questionmark on August 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Did you read the post? It says it was excluded because it was too old. Essentially, the judge said the evidence to be introduced was too stale, and it could be irrelevant to the specific incident at hand. This is much like a judge excluding a drunk driving charge from 15 years ago while you are being charged with reckless driving now. As to whether the exclusion is proper is another matter.

GWB on August 20, 2013 at 1:52 PM

I thought the goal of a trial was to get at the truth…

redshirt on August 20, 2013 at 12:47 PM

The truth is the last thing the Obama administration wants the public to hear.

AZCoyote on August 20, 2013 at 2:00 PM

All truth and logic have gone out the window with the politically correct mindset. They believe somehow, it’s “for the greater good”. If I ever hear anyone utter that phrase (thinking it’s a good thing), then I will just punch them in the face, and await my PC sentencing.

kirkill on August 20, 2013 at 2:03 PM

Those in the U.S. Army “judicial system” have become politicized and corrupt.

VorDaj on August 20, 2013 at 2:09 PM

Judge Says Courts Must Accept Shariah Influence

bazil9 on August 20, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Charlie’s inside the wire.

bofh on August 20, 2013 at 2:11 PM

The judge must be an Obama operative and fan of the Muslim Brotherhood…

albill on August 20, 2013 at 1:15 PM

It would seem so. But Hassan will talk all about jihad so it doesn’t matter. She can’t stop Hasan from sticking his thumb in Obama’s eye.

dogsoldier on August 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM

No – it still matters. Just because facts will come out *in spite* of the judge doesn’t mean her attempt to suppress those facts is not in and of itself problematic.

Midas on August 20, 2013 at 2:16 PM

Why is the Army trying to prosecute Hasan as a jihadist? Don’t they take direction from their Commander in Chief? It’s workplace violence.

Why the hell is it taking so long to find this guy guilty? Jihadist or not – it’s time to face the firing squad.

Hill60 on August 20, 2013 at 2:18 PM

evidence would not have been “too old” for motive if DOD had not been dragging its feet starting the trial.
funny how that worked out huh?

dmacleo on August 20, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Aren’t all military combat casualties “workplace violence?”

myiq2xu on August 20, 2013 at 12:13 PM

Hmmmm…..Barry should think so, then all combat pay can be revoked, since combat is part of the military “workplace”.

The money saved can be generously applied to more important govvernment expenses: lavish vacays for Mooch, the girls and Bo for boosting their morale, getting ‘em out of that cramped jail-like WH more often.

hawkeye54 on August 20, 2013 at 2:25 PM

The only reason that the evidence is “too old” is that the military leadership has been stalling in starting the trial.

RoadRunner on August 20, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Justice in 21st century America is no longer interested in finding the truth.

sadatoni on August 20, 2013 at 2:38 PM

The judge probably has orders ‘from the top’ to make sure Hasan gets off.

xmanvietnam on August 20, 2013 at 2:48 PM

Herr Oberst was only following orders.

claudius on August 20, 2013 at 2:54 PM

Does the military still use firing squads?

Rovin on August 20, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Hanging

With a stout hemp rope.

Solaratov on August 20, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Hasan trial judge: Prosecutors barred from mentioning “jihad” motive

and the words :”shoot” “shot” “gun” “dead” “death” “violence” and “victims”.

Dr. ZhivBlago on August 20, 2013 at 4:21 PM

thatsafactjack on August 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM

How old are you? Because it is highly unlikely you will see this administration held accountable in your life time.

chemman on August 20, 2013 at 4:36 PM

D-fusit on August 20, 2013 at 1:02 PM

60 years? I wasn’t aware that he also stole billions from junk bond clients to warrant that long of a sentence.

chemman on August 20, 2013 at 4:41 PM

We need some wholesale impeachment action going on here. I am sick of hearing about judges focusing on denying valid information to the juries, and on denying “standing” whenever they feel like completely blocking justice. This ruling by this judge amounts to aiding and abetting the enemy.

Spartacus on August 20, 2013 at 4:46 PM

That judge should be removed and replaced with someone who will allow relevant evidence and an actual motive to be introduced.

What a jackass.

TX-96 on August 20, 2013 at 5:46 PM

I am sure the politically correct decisions by Col. Tara Osborn will help advance her career. I served in the Air Force, but there is no way I would encourage my son or daughter to serve in today’s U.S. military.

bw222 on August 20, 2013 at 6:14 PM

It would be easy to blame this on Obama but the Republicans have more than their part in this PC insanity. —Regular Right Guy …Full Caf Americano

Mornin Mojo on August 20, 2013 at 6:20 PM

insanity…

deedtrader on August 20, 2013 at 6:56 PM

At this point why would anyone but a Kook leftist join the military?

Kjeil on August 20, 2013 at 7:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2