Federal judge allows Conyers on ballot even though he didn’t have the signatures, natch

posted at 7:21 pm on May 23, 2014 by Mary Katharine Ham

Remember when this happened for Rep. Thad McCotter, thus ensuring that he would remain in the House of Representatives even though he didn’t collect the signatures state election law requires to get on the ballot? No? That’s because it didn’t happen. Nor should it have, even if the signatures hadn’t been determined to be partially fraudulent. There are rules in place well before the primary, and incumbents like McCotter and Conyers are and should be well aware of them. But Conyers’ story has a different ending than McCotter’s.

Today, Rep. John Conyers lost his ballot appeal with the state elections board because he came up 400 votes short for being on the ballot in the primary. At that time, his people said he planned to wage a write-in campaign. But several hours later, a federal judget came to the rescue because as soon as Conyers can’t manage to meet this rather simple threshold after almost 50 years in office, it’s now unconstitutional, or something.

Conyers needed 1,000 petition signatures to get a spot in the Democratic primary. But many petitions were thrown out because the people who gathered names weren’t registered voters or listed a wrong registration address. That left him more than 400 short.

But Leitman’s injunction said a Michigan law that puts strict requirements on petition circulators is similar to an Ohio law that was struck down as unconstitutional by a federal appeals court in 2008.

Leitman said the free speech rights of Conyers and the circulators were harmed, an argument pressed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

There’s evidence that the failure to comply with the law was a “result of good-faith mistakes and that (circulators) believed they were in compliance with the statute,” the judge said.

Conyers, 85, told WXYZ-TV,”I’m trying not to smile openly much but this is very good news, and it’s also good news for the process.”

What other long-standing rules and regulations hurt Conyers’ free speech rights, I wonder, by preventing him from doing whatever the hell he wants whenever he wants to?

Back when the decision of the state elections board still stood, Politico pointed out he massive blow this might mean to the Michigan delegation’s already endangered seniority in Congress. Get ready to have your stomach turned by our citizen legislature:

If Conyers doesn’t make the ballot and loses his write-in bid, it would represent another blow to Michigan’s congressional seniority. The state could lose roughly 190 years of congressional seniority at the end of this year.

Democrat John Dingell, the Dean of the House, is retiring after nearly 60 years in the House. GOP Reps. Dave Camp and Mike Rogers, with a combined 38 years of seniority, aren’t seeking reelection, either.

Democratic Sen. Carl Levin is retiring after his sixth term in the upper chamber. Rep. Gary Peters, who has served six years in the House, is locked in a difficult race to succeed Levin.

Background on the Conyers ballot fail, here.

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 3

lol

land of the free!

Murphy9 on May 23, 2014 at 7:23 PM

LANCIE!

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:23 PM

Because, racist.

Wisdom_of_Homer on May 23, 2014 at 7:23 PM

Rep. Thad McCotter, thus ensuring that he would remain in the House of Representatives even though he didn’t collect the signatures state election law requires to get on the ballot? No? That’s because it didn’t happen.

Did he file a lawsuit?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:24 PM

What a surprise… Rush called it.

CPT. Charles on May 23, 2014 at 7:24 PM

Rules and laws are for suckers.

Suckers.

I’m kinda ready to just burn this whole f*cking thing down at this point.

Midas on May 23, 2014 at 7:25 PM

Because, racist.

Wisdom_of_Homer on May 23, 2014 at 7:23 PM

D’OH!

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 7:25 PM

The state could lose roughly 190 years of congressional seniority at the end of this year.

And it would be much better represented as a result.

Midas on May 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Leitman said the free speech rights of Conyers and the circulators were harmed, an argument pressed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

Um…since when does running for office become a “free speech rights” issue?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM

The judge is an Obama appointee. As quickly as this happened, I have to believe the decision was made even before the Michigan Secretary of State announced her decision.

bw222 on May 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Who didn’t see this coming?

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

So basically, anyone can run for congress in his district???

Right now there should be at least 400 people on the ballot….

BigWyo on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Exhibit #3,447,329 of a banana republic police state …

ShainS on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Meeting a requirement to collect signatures is a first amendment violation?

What?

mankai on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Query: Can the Great State of Squishigan appeal this ruling? I mean, seriously? Doesn’t state laws count for ANYTHING anymore?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:28 PM

There’s evidence that the failure to comply with the law was a “result of good-faith mistakes and that (circulators) believed they were in compliance with the statute,” the judge said.

That’s the standard?

“We believe we’re in complicance” = being in complicance?

Will that work when I don’t pay my full taxes?

Bitter Clinger on May 23, 2014 at 7:28 PM

Who didn’t see this coming?

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

Libs.

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Remember when this happened for Rep. Thad McCotter, thus ensuring that he would remain in the House of Representatives even though he didn’t collect the signatures state election law requires to get on the ballot? No? That’s because it didn’t happen.

It also turns out that McCotter (or his campaign) fraudulently forged about 1,500 of those.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Affirmative (Judicial) Action.

whatcat on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

The dude is 85 years old, and the sheeple will dutifully relect him in November.

cat_owner on May 23, 2014 at 7:30 PM

You thought we were a nation of laws?

LOL

Bring on the hot war, I’m done acting like this is a civil and polite law abiding society.

I got my rail buggy gased up and leather chaps on. We rally around Lord Humongous or Master Blaster?

Murphy9 on May 23, 2014 at 7:30 PM

Um…since when does running for office become a “free speech rights” issue?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Since the candidate is a minority, nuff said…

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:30 PM

I expected this.

AUINSC on May 23, 2014 at 7:30 PM

Why do we need petitions to get on a ballot?

Let’s all declare our candidacies, then vote for ourselves.

Left Coast Right Mind on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

How and why is a FEDERAL judge ruling on a STATE matter?!?!?

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Libs.

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

Heh…

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Are they going to have his picture on the ballot with a flashing arrow showing “vote for the black guy”?

SouthernGent on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

I do hope the state appeals this ruling.

albill on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

C’mon Michigan GOP, fight this, please.

Fallon on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Puke!

gophergirl on May 23, 2014 at 7:32 PM

Leitman said the free speech rights of Conyers and the circulators were harmed, an argument pressed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan.

Um…since when does running for office become a “free speech rights” issue?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:26 PM

Good question.

And why doesn’t that extend to campaign donations? Don’t limits harm free speech rights?

Bitter Clinger on May 23, 2014 at 7:32 PM

When Bob “the Torch” Toriccelli was nailed on blatant corruption charges 30 days before the general election in New Jersey a while back, he dropped out of the race. The New Jersey constitution said that the ballot could not be changed within 45 days of the election. But the leftist New Jersey Supreme Court came to the rescue, and allowed the Dems to bring Frank Lautenberg out of mothballs and put him on the ballot, the constitution be damned.

Rules are for sheep. Republican sheep. The leftist judges will always ride to the rescue of Dems in trouble.

iurockhead on May 23, 2014 at 7:32 PM

Writing law from the bench. Big time.

wolly4321 on May 23, 2014 at 7:32 PM

How and why is a FEDERAL judge ruling on a STATE matter?!?!?

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Because the (Dis)honourable mr Conyers didn’t the state of Michigan has the right to tell him “No”

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

How and why is a FEDERAL judge ruling on a STATE matter?!?!?

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Federalism is so last century.

Bitter Clinger on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

SouthernGent on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Considering the dude has been in Congress for 50 or so years, the sheeple should know who to vote for.

cat_owner on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

How and why is a FEDERAL judge ruling on a STATE matter?!?!?

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Because Conyers argued that it violates the FEDERAL constitution.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

Leftist mindset:

I cannot abide by the rules, therefore the rules are wrong.

Left Coast Right Mind on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

That’s dumb!

coolrepublica on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

How and why is a FEDERAL judge ruling on a STATE matter?!?!?

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 7:31 PM

Because the (Dis)honourable mr Conyers didn’t believe the state of Michigan has the right to tell him “No”

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

[note to self: proofread THEN hit "submit comment"...]

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Rules and laws are for suckers.

Suckers.

I’m kinda ready to just burn this whole f*cking thing down at this point.

Midas on May 23, 2014 at 7:25 PM

I’ve got the lighter, you bring the gasoline.

I was sortof thinking more along the lines of rope, in this case.

GWB on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Who didn’t see this coming?

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:27 PM

No one.

What other long-standing rules and regulations hurt Conyers’ free speech rights, I wonder, by preventing him from doing whatever the hell he wants whenever he wants to?

All of them. Expecting Conyers to adhere to the law is racist, unlike expecting the white Thad McCotter to adhere to the law.

rbj on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

A lot of Democrat voters are relieved now. They weren’t sure they would know how to spell C-O-N-Y-E-R-S on the ballot in November.

Bitter Clinger on May 23, 2014 at 7:35 PM

The nature of the faith involved doesn’t matter with respect to compliance – only criminal proceedings. Any chance this can get overturned? The requirements certainly don’t seem unreasonable.

blink on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

That’s not true. Just off the top of my head there’s a bad faith requirement for some violations of (civil) security laws.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:35 PM

And people wonder why I’ve been in the “Let It Burn” camp since Election Day of 2012 …

OhioCoastie on May 23, 2014 at 7:35 PM

Check Yo Privilege.

swamp_yankee on May 23, 2014 at 7:35 PM

Because Conyers argued that it violates the FEDERAL constitution.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:33 PM

Lemme guess…the “Good and Plenty Clause” or the “Incumbent Has Seniority and Priviledges Clause”?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:36 PM

they don’t even hide it anymore. What do they teach at law school since, it seems, laws do not seem to be considered anymore. Being a judge used to be a mark of honor. Now it is just some political hack with a diploma.

warmairfan on May 23, 2014 at 7:36 PM

The left enjoys a lawless society, led by obama. This will not end easily or well.

GaltBlvnAtty on May 23, 2014 at 7:36 PM

He’s black and he’s a democrat. Anything less would be RACIST! !!

Jack_Burton on May 23, 2014 at 7:36 PM

Rules are for sheep. Republican sheep. The leftist judges will always ride to the rescue of Dems in trouble.

iurockhead on May 23, 2014 at 7:32 PM

Yes. The Laut & the Torch. Doug Forrester got too close to the brass ring.

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 7:37 PM

Why bother having laws anymore at all?

Why bother with an election? Just have the judge say Conyers is in Congress until he goes belly up and then his wife inherits the throne.

Curmudgeon on May 23, 2014 at 7:38 PM

Yawn.
Dog bites man.

yongoro on May 23, 2014 at 7:39 PM

That’s dumb!

coolrepublica on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

Well, it’s a start.

Stick around here long enough and keep an open mind and you’ll begin to see a lot of things you thought were smart are not so smart after all.

Cleombrotus on May 23, 2014 at 7:41 PM

We should have picked our own cotton…

Rix on May 23, 2014 at 7:42 PM

It also turns out that McCotter (or his campaign) fraudulently forged about 1,500 of those.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

So what?

He had a first amendment right to keep his job. Or something.

malclave on May 23, 2014 at 7:43 PM

The previous comment was hanging. Why is ping.chartbeat constantly tracking, loading and slowing things down on Hot Air? I’m sure Ed or AP can find less intrusive ways of tracking who is coming and going than using chartbeat.

CommieJuice on May 23, 2014 at 7:43 PM

The previous comment was hanging. Why is ping.chartbeat constantly tracking, loading and slowing things down on Hot Air? I’m sure Ed or AP can find less intrusive ways of tracking who is coming and going than using chartbeat.

CommieJuice on May 23, 2014 at 7:43 PM

Just block it on your firewall. Does wonders to loading speed.

Rix on May 23, 2014 at 7:46 PM

He is 85 years old! TERM LIMITS!!!

fight like a girl on May 23, 2014 at 7:48 PM

Anyone has a free speech right to run for office!

Getting on the ballot, however, has a bunch of laws and stuff and some minimal requirements to meet. Which he failed to do.

Not being on the ballot in no way, shape or form stops Conyors from running for office. He is just a write-in candidate and every so often one of those actually does with a race.

So not being on a ballot is no crippling factor to running for office.

ajacksonian on May 23, 2014 at 7:48 PM

Mich Rep. John Con Years may continue.

JohnFLob on May 23, 2014 at 7:51 PM

So what?

He had a first amendment right to keep his job. Or something.

malclave on May 23, 2014 at 7:43 PM

This is from the 6th Circuit case (quoting a simliar 7th Cir. case):

First, “being denied use of non-registered, non-resident circulators, they were required to allocate additional campaign resources to gather signatures and were deprived of the solicitors (political advocates) of their choice. This in itself can be an injury to First Amendment rights. Second, “because they were prohibited from using non-registered and non-resident circulators, they were limited in the choice and number of people to carry their message to the public.” Ibid. As Meyer makes clear, limiting the size of a candidate’s audience and reducing the amount of speech about his views that he can generate is a cognizable injury. ”

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:51 PM

The View From the Detroit *ahem!* Free Press

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:44 PM

Interesting little caveat in that article…

With Leitman’s ruling, barring a successful appeal, Conyers avoids what could have been an embarrassing end to a 50-year career in Congress in which he became a leading voice for liberals and civil rights.

oscarwilde on May 23, 2014 at 7:51 PM

C’mon Michigan GOP, fight this, please.

Fallon

BWaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha….

xblade on May 23, 2014 at 7:52 PM

This law is in no way unconstitutional because it does nothing to prevent Conyers from running. It has to do with whether his name appears on the ballot in the Democratic primary, but not whether he is able to run. This ruling is beyond idiotic. I hope it is appealed.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 7:53 PM

Land of the utterly stupid!!!

obama’s America is a Latrine.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:53 PM

C’mon Michigan GOP, fight this, please.

Fallon

The GOP is in Oakland County, not Wayne.

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 7:54 PM

LilliPutin “You dare preach at me, obama? Who do you think you are?”

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:54 PM

oscarwilde on May 23, 2014 at 7:51 PM

Yeah, I saw that too. Need you guess what my initial reaction was?

You guessed it: o_O

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 7:55 PM

His district gets the Congressman it deserves.

22044 on May 23, 2014 at 7:55 PM

That’s dumb!

coolrepublica on May 23, 2014 at 7:34 PM

If you make one more objective comment today,
Roses on the way!

I predicted earlier that if this won’t happen Holder will appoint him to the post :)

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:55 PM

He’s as stupid as Maxine Waters, and that one is waaaaay stupid.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:56 PM

This law is in no way unconstitutional because it does nothing to prevent Conyers from running. It has to do with whether his name appears on the ballot in the Democratic primary, but not whether he is able to run. This ruling is beyond idiotic. I hope it is appealed.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 7:53 PM

That’s not quite right. The reason it was held unconstitutional is because have a first amendment right to choose who you want to circulate the petitions to get you on the ballot. Michigan requires that those people be registered voters in Michigan apparently in order to avoid fraud. The court said there are less restrictive means of preventing fraud than requiring that the circulators be registered voters.

Unfortunately, MKH didn’t take the time to link to the opinion (or, it seems, read it). Here you go.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

The interesting thing going ahead is Conyers’ district is something like +45 Democrat, so there’s no question the ‘D’ nominee will be elected in November. Which means this is a Democrat-vs.-Democrat battle. So it will be up to Conyers’ opponent, Rev. Horace Sheffield, to challenge the legality of the judge’s ruling, with no Republican in sight in this battle.

jon1979 on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

The previous comment was hanging. Why is ping.chartbeat constantly tracking, loading and slowing things down on Hot Air? I’m sure Ed or AP can find less intrusive ways of tracking who is coming and going than using chartbeat.

CommieJuice on May 23, 2014 at 7:43 PM

on firefox/palemoon right?
its not. its how ff displays it
it means the PREVIOUS file has not loaded basically
http://blog.chartbeat.com/2009/06/22/does-chartbeat-slow-sites-down/

dmacleo on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

The judge must be looking for a promotion.

If this doesn’t lead to further suits, I will be surprised.

ha_tspc on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

A woman R will take Levin’s seat, with God’s help. That will be the ultimate justice.

Levin belongs in prison, btw.

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

Is his wife still in prison?

OmahaConservative on May 23, 2014 at 7:58 PM

The judge must be looking for a promotion.

ha_tspc on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

I’m quite happy with my current rank thankyouverymuch!

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 7:59 PM

MLK fought/died for absolutely nothing, poor dude!

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 7:59 PM

Ridiculous decision based on a theory that has nothing to do with the actual Constitution. Not surprising coming from a federal judge in the year 2014.

DisneyFan on May 23, 2014 at 7:59 PM

I’m quite happy with my current rank thankyouverymuch!

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 7:59 PM

:)

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

That’s not quite right. The reason it was held unconstitutional is because have a first amendment right to choose who you want to circulate the petitions to get you on the ballot. Michigan requires that those people be registered voters in Michigan apparently in order to avoid fraud. The court said there are less restrictive means of preventing fraud than requiring that the circulators be registered voters.

Unfortunately, MKH didn’t take the time to link to the opinion (or, it seems, read it). Here you go.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

You know that’s a bunch of el toro poo-poo, yes?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

Ridiculous decision based on a theory that has nothing to do with the actual Constitution. Not surprising coming from a federal judge in the year 2014.

DisneyFan on May 23, 2014 at 7:59 PM

Have you read the opinion?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

The REAL problem here was what was the Democrat Party going to do with all those ballots already marked as voting for Conyers?

Mahdi on May 23, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Have you read the opinion?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

Have you read the Constitution?

Newtie and the Beauty on May 23, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Have you read the opinion?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

Can you read?

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM

And Nader v. Blackwell, the Ohio law this dumb a$$ judge is referring to, had to do with out of state signature collectors. But guess what? Ohio still requires signature collectors from the state to be registered voters.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Let it burn.

Straight democrat in 2014.
Hillary in 2016.

Let. It. Burn.

ROCnPhilly on May 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Before I even begin to care, what are the chances of his replacement being conservative? 0%. Ok. Than I still don’t care.

phatfawzi on May 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

Fozzie Bear here seems to be the resident guineaworm on this post.

Judge_Dredd on May 23, 2014 at 8:03 PM

Conyers needed 1,000 petition signatures to get a spot in the Democratic primary. But many petitions were thrown out because the people who gathered names weren’t registered voters or listed a wrong registration address. That left him more than 400 short.

Mucking foron

Schadenfreude on May 23, 2014 at 8:03 PM

That’s not quite right. The reason it was held unconstitutional is because have a first amendment right to choose who you want to circulate the petitions to get you on the ballot. Michigan requires that those people be registered voters in Michigan apparently in order to avoid fraud. The court said there are less restrictive means of preventing fraud than requiring that the circulators be registered voters.

Unfortunately, MKH didn’t take the time to link to the opinion (or, it seems, read it). Here you go.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:57 PM

Seriously, what is less restrictive than requiring someone to be registered to vote? Tell us.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 8:04 PM

I’m kinda ready to just burn this whole f*cking thing down at this point.

Midas on May 23, 2014 at 7:25 PM

I’ll bring the torches, some guns, and a whole bunch of ammo…

Wyznowski on May 23, 2014 at 8:04 PM

And Nader v. Blackwell, the Ohio law this dumb a$$ judge is referring to, had to do with out of state signature collectors. But guess what? Ohio still requires signature collectors from the state to be registered voters.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 8:02 PM

Has anyone challenged that?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:04 PM

It also turns out that McCotter (or his campaign) fraudulently forged about 1,500 of those.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 7:29 PM

As opposed to legitimately forged?
If they were fraudulently forged, then they weren’t forged, making the forgeries illegitimate, and McCotter should be given his seat retroactively.

Mimzey on May 23, 2014 at 8:06 PM

Have you read the opinion?

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:00 PM

The time to challenge the law, was before the ballot signing began. By starting the process without challenge, his campaign implicitly agreed to the law as written at the time.

Rebar on May 23, 2014 at 8:06 PM

Seriously, what is less restrictive than requiring someone to be registered to vote? Tell us.

NotCoach on May 23, 2014 at 8:04 PM

If you read the opinion:

In particular, the State may require a petition circulator to “accept the jurisdiction of this State for the purpose of any legal proceeding or hearing initiated … that concerns a petition sheet executed by the circulator” and require that the circulator agree “that legal process served on the secretary of state or a designated agent of the secretary of
state has the same effect as if personally served on the circulator.” MCL § 168.544c(4), as amended by Public Act 94 of 2014, effective April 3, 2014. In fact, that is exactly what the State did earlier this year with respect to individuals
wishing to circulate petitions for referenda, constitutional amendments, and certain political offices elected statewide, including President of the United States and the United States Senate. It eliminated the need for these petitioners to be registered voters. See id.

themuppet on May 23, 2014 at 8:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3