Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
March 31, 2022

The 10 Best Spring Beers on the Market Right Now

From seasonal saisons to pilsners perfect for the patio.


In terms of seasons, spring is notoriously the hardest one to categorize. Temperatures volley back and forth and we’re never sure when we’re quite ready to ditch our winter coats. But the universally held truth appears to be that the budding of trees and the sprouting of fresh flowers does something to the air that makes a hard-earned beer taste that much better. Fortunately, there has literally never been a better time to support your local breweries, no matter the season. Spring is ripe with great beer releases, including Vienna-style lagers, crisp witbiers, and pilsers perfect for the patio. If you’re looking for some inspiration, we’ve picked some of our favorite spring seasonal beers that should do the trick.

Industrial Arts Spring Landscape

6.2% ABV
Garnersville, New York

Industrial Arts has managed to become something of a household name in the craft beer community thanks in no small part to its solid core lineup of hop-driven pale ales, IPAs, and DIPAs. But despite this notoriety, the brewery is much more than just a hop-focused operation as evidenced by this year’s spring release in its Landscape series. This Helles bock perfectly lands the flavor profile required to straddle the change in weather from cool to ever-so-slightly warm with hints of honey and herbs fleshed out by freshly baked bread flavors. And as if that’s not impressive enough, it’s also made using ingredients that were entirely sourced from within New York State.

Saison Dupont

6.5% ABV
Tourpes, Belgium

Spring may be a time for cleaning, organizing, and welcoming in the new, but when it comes to beer, sometimes the best decision you can make is to go with a longtime favorite. Like rewatching a classic movie, Saison Dupont lives on in the beer world as a widely adored favorite for being a rustic, traditional bottled option that always seems to hold something new every time you revisit it. It has a super complex nose that smells like a barnyard in the first days after a long winter thaw with flavors that are equally complex. Thanks to second fermentation in the bottle, tart flavors and strong carbonation dazzle the palate with each sip while earthy aromatics linger through a long finish. Show up to any dinner party hosted by a beer geek with this in your hand and they’ll likely applaud you at the front door.

Humble Sea Deeeeep Fog

8.8% ABV
Santa Cruz, California

It may seem hard to believe after, well, literally everything about the past two years, but in 2022, the beer industry appears to have stuck to their guns and gone all-in on the New England-style IPA. And since it’s been quite some time since the now-ubiquitous style was confined to breweries in the Northeast corner of the country, the sheer volume of the NEIPAs on the market can make it basically impossible to see the haze through the sea of haze. So, when shopping for this style, it’s usually best to go with whatever is the very freshest or—perhaps more importantly—going for a beer that also supports a good cause. Humble Sea’s “foggy” DIPA is as dense as the atmospheric soup that can hit the California coast it calls home with bright tropical fruit, citrus, and cotton candy flavors. Beyond that, the brewery itself has “raised tens of thousands of dollars and gobs of awareness for local groups and nonprofits thanks to the community of Santa Cruz, the Bay Area, and beyond” since opening up in 2015.

March 31, 2022

The GOP's Vision For America Is Far Scarier Than You Can Possibly Imagine

And if Republicans gain control of the country, the toxic slurry of rage, hate, fascism, and white nationalism will make Russian authoritarianism look tame.



Republicans do not float trial balloons so much as announce the next stop on their crazy train. Some of us have been trying to get this message across for literally years and now, here we are. It was never going to end with abortion. They were always going to go after all contraceptives for women. They were always going to try to end marriage equality. They were always going to try to make homosexuality illegal again. Now they’re telling us that interracial marriage has got to go, too. It is just a matter of time until the Republican extremists on the Supreme Court find an excuse. It will not have to be consistent with logic, the Constitution, the law, or even their own previous rulings. It will be about power and the sheer abuse of it. You think the First Amendment is safe? Why?

Once Republicans have rigged elections so they cannot lose, they will use their newfound freedom from accountability and the corrupted courts to seize control of the media. This is what authoritarians always do. In the meantime, they will use the vast media megaphone they already have to turn their base into a cudgel. Millions of Republican voters are already eager to dispense violence in the name of “patriotism.” This may sound insane, but the Oath Keepers militia had a cache of weapons right outside of DC, waiting to be called in. They were waiting for permission from Trump to start shooting people. If Trump had been less of a coward and more of a blood-thirsty tyrant, a lot more people would have died on January 6, 2021.

Remember, a large number of Republicans fully support political violence in America now. All they need is permission and the pogroms will begin in earnest. With a lock on the levers of power, that permission will be given and off the mob will go, looking for “traitors” and “the Deep State.” When push comes to shove, once they’re told that they can hurt and kill the people they hate with impunity, just like in the good ol’ days of lynchings and race riots, there is absolutely nothing to suggest the nice white people of the American right-wing won’t be back out in the streets again. This time, while they burn black men alive and hang them from trees, they won’t just be taking pictures, they’ll be posting them to Facebook and Instagram. Proud to be an #American and a #patriot! Wish you were here!

Putin can only dream of turning his people into this kind of weapon. The Soviet Union had the KGB to keep the populace living in fear. Modern-day Russia has the FSB and they do have that history of pogroms. But America will have millions of racists ready and eager to dish out American justice to anyone who isn’t loyal enough to the homeland. If that’s the future you want, keep sleeping while Republicans rig elections and suppress the vote. Just let it happen and hope no one comes for you. Or you can donate, volunteer, and never stop raising your voice as loudly as you can until these monsters are driven back into the shadows. Look to what’s happening to Russia to see the faintest shadow of what Republicans have planned for us.

March 31, 2022

DRYER (Anders Bryngelsson) Untitled 1st and 2nd 12" EPs 2001/2002 (FULL) Sweden Techno Minimal

Label: Klang Elektronik – KLANG 59
Vinyl, 12"
Country: Germany
Released: 2001
Genre: Electronic
Style: Techno, Minimal

Label: Klang Elektronik – KLANG 68, Klang Elektronik – nr. 68
Vinyl, 12", EP, 33 ⅓ RPM
Country: Germany
Released: 6 May 2002
Genre: Electronic
Style: Dub Techno, Minimal

March 31, 2022

'Pouring gasoline on the fire': JPMorgan, Citi, other U.S. banks lead rise in lending to oil and gas

JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Bank of America together account for one quarter of all fossil fuel financing identified over the last six years


Financing of the oil and gas industry that is helping drive global temperatures to a dangerous point has snapped back strongly, a new report says. In fact, current spending tops the capital flowing in 2016, the year just after arguably the most significate climate pledge to date was struck in Paris.

The 60 banks profiled in the report funnelled $185.5 billion just last year into the 100 companies doing the most to expand the oil CL00, -5.48% and gas sector, says a group of environmental nonprofits, which reports such findings in their 13th annual Banking on Climate Chaos release.

The release documents that in the six years since the adoption of the Paris Agreement — setting a no more than 2 degrees Celsius and, ideally, 1.5 degrees, warming limit — the world’s 60 largest banks financed fossil fuels with $4.6 trillion in loans and other capital. That includes $742 billion in 2021 alone as the world recovered from the worst of COVID-19.

The report shows that overall fossil-fuel financing remains dominated by four U.S. banks, with JPMorgan Chase JPM, -1.85%, Citigroup C, -1.86%, Wells Fargo WFC, -2.27%, and Bank of America BAC, -2.68% together accounting for one quarter of all fossil fuel financing identified over the last six years. The group calling for bank reform also leveraged their findings with reference to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the broader risk that geopolitical instability brings to energy markets.

March 31, 2022

an easy to read condensed version of the ruling stating Trump more than likely committed crimes

The ruling is public domain, not at all copyrighted, so the 4 paragraph rule doesn't apply.

I have removed footnotes and broken up long paragraphs into smaller ones for ease of digestion purposes, but no other material alterations were made at all, this is straight copied text.



Attempts to obstruct

Section 1512(c)(2) requires that the obstructive conduct have a “nexus . . . to a specific
official proceeding” that was “either pending or was reasonably foreseeable to [the person]
when he engaged in the conduct.” President Trump attempted to obstruct an official
proceeding by launching a pressure campaign to convince Vice President Pence to disrupt the
Joint Session on January 6.

President Trump facilitated two meetings in the days before January 6 that were
explicitly tied to persuading Vice President Pence to disrupt the Joint Session of Congress. On
January 4, President Trump and Dr. Eastman hosted a meeting in the Oval Office with Vice
President Pence, the Vice President’s counsel Greg Jacob, and the Vice President’s Chief of
Staff Marc Short.

At that meeting, Dr. Eastman presented his plan to Vice President Pence,
focusing on either rejecting electors or delaying the count. When Vice President Pence was
unpersuaded, President Trump sent Dr. Eastman to review the plan in depth with the Vice
President’s counsel on January 5. Vice President Pence’s counsel interpreted Dr. Eastman’s
presentation as being on behalf of the President.

On the morning of January 6, President Trump made several last-minute “revised
appeal[s] to the Vice President” to pressure him into carrying out the plan. At 1:00 am,
President Trump tweeted: “If Vice President @Mike_Pence comes through for us, we will win
the Presidency . . . Mike can send it back!” At 8:17 am, President Trump tweeted: “All Mike
Pence has to do is send them back to the States, AND WE WIN. Do it Mike, this is a time for
extreme courage!”

Shortly after, President Trump rang Vice President Pence and once again
urged him “to make the call” and enact the plan. Just before the Joint Session of Congress
began, President Trump gave a speech to a large crowd on the Ellipse in which he warned,
“[a]nd Mike Pence, I hope you’re going to stand up for the good of our Constitution and for the
good of our country. And if you’re not, I’m going to be very disappointed in you. I will tell you
right now.”

President Trump ended his speech by galvanizing the crowd to join him in
enacting the plan: “[L]et’s walk down Pennsylvania Avenue” to give Vice President Pence and
Congress “the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”

Together, these actions more likely than not constitute attempts to obstruct an official

Official proceeding

The Court next analyzes whether the Joint Session of Congress to count electoral votes
on January 6, 2021, constituted an “official proceeding” under the obstruction statute. The
United States Code defines “official proceeding” to include “a proceeding before the

The Twelfth Amendment outlines the steps to elect the President, culminating in
the President of the Senate opening state votes “in the presence of the Senate and House of
Representatives.” Dr. Eastman does not dispute that the Joint Session is an “official

While there is no binding authority interpreting “proceeding before the Congress,”
ten colleagues from the District of Columbia have concluded that the 2021 electoral count was
an “official proceeding” within the meaning of section 1512(c)(2), and the Court joins those
well-reasoned opinions.

Corrupt intent

A person violates § 1512(c) when they obstruct an official proceeding with a corrupt
mindset. The Ninth Circuit has not defined “corruptly” for purposes of this statute.222 However,
the court has made clear that the threshold for acting “corruptly” is lower than “consciousness
of wrongdoing,” meaning a person does not need to know their actions are wrong to break
the law.

Because President Trump likely knew that the plan to disrupt the electoral count was
wrongful, his mindset exceeds the threshold for acting “corruptly” under § 1512(c).
President Trump and Dr. Eastman justified the plan with allegations of election fraud—
but President Trump likely knew the justification was baseless, and therefore that the entire
plan was unlawful.

Although Dr. Eastman argues that President Trump was advised several
state elections were fraudulent, the Select Committee points to numerous executive branch
officials who publicly stated and privately stressed to President Trump that there was no
evidence of fraud.

By early January, more than sixty courts dismissed cases alleging fraud due
to lack of standing or lack of evidence, noting that they made “strained legal arguments
without merit and speculative accusations” and that “there is no evidence to support
accusations of voter fraud.”

President Trump’s repeated pleas for Georgia Secretary of
State Raffensperger clearly demonstrate that his justification was not to investigate fraud, but to
win the election: “So what are we going to do here, folks? I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I
need 11,000 votes. Give me a break.”

Taken together, this evidence demonstrates that
President Trump likely knew the electoral count plan had no factual justification.

The plan not only lacked factual basis but also legal justification. Dr. Eastman’s memo
noted that the plan was “BOLD, Certainly.” The memo declared Dr. Eastman’s intent to step
outside the bounds of normal legal practice: “we’re no longer playing by Queensbury Rules.”
In addition, Vice President Pence “very consistent[ly]” made clear to President Trump that the
plan was unlawful, refusing “many times” to unilaterally reject electors or return them to the

In the meeting in the Oval Office two days before January 6, Vice President Pence
stressed his “immediate instinct that there is no way that one person could be entrusted by the
Framers to exercise that authority.”

Dr. Eastman argues that the plan was legally justified as it “was grounded on a good
faith interpretation of the Constitution.” But “ignorance of the law is no excuse,” and
believing the Electoral Count Act was unconstitutional did not give President Trump license to
violate it.

Disagreeing with the law entitled President Trump to seek a remedy in court, not to
disrupt a constitutionally-mandated process.

And President Trump knew how to pursue
election claims in court—after filing and losing more than sixty suits, this plan was a last-ditch
attempt to secure the Presidency by any means.

The illegality of the plan was obvious. Our nation was founded on the peaceful transition
of power, epitomized by George Washington laying down his sword to make way for
democratic elections.

Ignoring this history, President Trump vigorously campaigned for the
Vice President to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election.

As Vice President Pence stated, “no Vice President in American history has ever asserted such authority.”

Every American—and certainly the President of the United States—knows that in a democracy,
leaders are elected, not installed. With a plan this “BOLD,” President Trump knowingly tried
to subvert this fundamental principle.

Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump
corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.

Conspiracy to defraud the United States

The Select Committee also alleges that President Trump, Dr. Eastman, and others
conspired to defraud the United States by disrupting the electoral count, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 371.

That crime requires that (1) at least two people entered into an agreement to
obstruct a lawful function of the government (2) by deceitful or dishonest means, and (3) that a
member of the conspiracy engaged in at least one overt act in furtherance of the agreement.
Agreement to obstruct a lawful government function.

As the Court discussed at length above, the evidence demonstrates that President
Trump likely attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.

While the Court earlier analyzed those actions as attempts to obstruct an “official proceeding,”
Congress convening to count electoral votes is also a “lawful function of government” within the
meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 371, which Dr. Eastman does not dispute.

An “agreement” between co-conspirators need not be express and can be inferred from
the conspirators’ conduct.

There is strong circumstantial evidence to show that there was
likely an agreement between President Trump and Dr. Eastman to enact the plan articulated in
Dr. Eastman’s memo.

In the days leading up to January 6, Dr. Eastman and President Trump
had two meetings with high-ranking officials to advance the plan.

On January 4, President Trump and Dr. Eastman hosted a meeting in the Oval Office to persuade
Vice President Pence to carry out the plan.

The next day, President Trump sent Dr. Eastman
to continue discussions with the Vice President’s staff, in which Vice President Pence’s counsel
perceived Dr. Eastman as the President’s representative. Leading small meetings in the heart
of the White House implies an agreement between the President and Dr. Eastman and a shared
goal of advancing the electoral count plan.

The strength of this agreement was evident from President Trump’s
praise for Dr. Eastman and his plan in his January 6 speech on the Ellipse: “John is one of the
most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, ‘What an absolute
disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution.’”

Based on these repeated meetings and statements, the evidence shows that an agreement
to enact the electoral count plan likely existed between President Trump and Dr. Eastman.
Deceitful or dishonest means.

Obstruction of a lawful government function violates § 371 when it is carried out “by
deceit, craft or trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest.” While acting on a “good
faith misunderstanding” of the law is not dishonest, “merely disagreeing with the law does not
constitute a good faith misunderstanding . . . because all persons have a duty to obey the law
whether or not they agree with it.”

The Court discussed above how the evidence shows that President Trump likely knew
that the electoral count plan was illegal. President Trump continuing to push that plan despite
being aware of its illegality constituted obstruction by “dishonest” means under § 371.

The evidence also demonstrates that Dr. Eastman likely knew that the plan was
unlawful. Dr. Eastman heard from numerous mentors and like-minded colleagues that his plan
had no basis in history or precedent.

Fourth Circuit Judge Luttig, for whom Dr. Eastman
clerked, publicly stated that the plan’s analysis was “incorrect at every turn.” Vice President
Pence’s legal counsel spent hours refuting each part of the plan to Dr. Eastman, including
noting there had never been a departure from the Electoral Count Act and that not “a single
one of [the] Framers would agree with [his] position.”

Dr. Eastman himself repeatedly recognized that his plan had no legal support. In his
discussion with the Vice President’s counsel, Dr. Eastman “acknowledged” the “100 percent
consistent historical practice since the time of the Founding” that the Vice President did not
have the authority to act as the memo proposed.

More importantly, Dr. Eastman admitted
more than once that “his proposal violate[d] several provisions of statutory law,” including
explicitly characterizing the plan as “one more relatively minor violation” of the Electoral
Count Act. In addition, on January 5, Dr. Eastman conceded that the Supreme Court would
unanimously reject his plan for the Vice President to reject electoral votes.

Later that day, Dr. Eastman admitted that his “more palatable” idea to have the Vice President
delay, rather than reject counting electors, rested on “the same basic legal theory”
that he knew would not survive judicial scrutiny.

Dr. Eastman’s views on the Electoral Count Act are not, as he argues, a “good faith
interpretation” of the law; they are a partisan distortion of the democratic process.

His plan was driven not by preserving the Constitution, but by winning the 2020 election:
[Dr. Eastman] acknowledged that he didn’t think Kamala Harris should have that authority in 2024; he
didn’t think Al Gore should have had it in 2000; and he acknowledged that no small government
conservative should think that that was the case.

Dr. Eastman also understood the gravity of his plan for democracy—he acknowledged “[y]ou
would just have the same party win continuously if [the] Vice President had the authority to just
declare the winner of every State.”

The evidence shows that Dr. Eastman was aware that his plan violated the Electoral
Count Act. Dr. Eastman likely acted deceitfully and dishonestly each time he pushed an
outcome-driven plan that he knew was unsupported by the law.

Overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy President Trump and Dr. Eastman participated in
numerous overt acts in furtherance of their shared plan.

As detailed at length above, President Trump’s acts to strong-arm Vice
President Pence into following the plan included meeting with and calling the Vice President
and berating him in a speech to thousands outside the Capitol. Dr. Eastman joined for one of
those meetings, spent hours attempting to convince the Vice President’s counsel to support the
plan, and gave his own speech at the Ellipse “demanding” the Vice President “stand up” and
enact his plan.

Based on the evidence, the Court finds that it is more likely than not that President
Trump and Dr. Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on
January 6, 2021.


March 31, 2022

WaPo Op-Ed: A federal judge said Trump probably committed a crime. The DOJ can't ignore that.

“A coup in search of a legal theory.”


By George T. Conway III
Contributing columnist

That was the sober, and apt, assessment made this week of former president Donald Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election — not by a partisan or pundit, but in an opinion by a federal judge. And although that ruling, by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, did not decide a criminal case, it ought to presage one.

We don’t know whether the Justice Department has been considering criminal charges against Trump, or whether it will. We do know that Attorney General Merrick Garland, in a speech commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Capitol insurrection, vowed that the Justice Department was “committed to holding all Jan. 6th perpetrators, at any level, accountable under law — whether they were present that day or were otherwise criminally responsible for the assault on our democracy.” Carter’s conclusion makes clear that, for the attorney general’s commitment to be met, the Justice Department’s criminal investigation of Jan. 6 must focus closely on Trump.

The court’s ruling came in a lawsuit that one of Trump’s lawyers, John Eastman, brought against the select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Eastman served as the legal architect of Trump’s effort to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to count numerous states’ electoral votes on Jan. 6. Eastman asserted his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination 146 times at his deposition before the select committee. His lawsuit argued that some of his emails should be kept from the committee because they were shielded by either attorney-client privilege or “work product” privilege, which protects confidential documents prepared for litigation.

The opinion by Carter, a former prosecutor nominated to the bench by President Bill Clinton, makes clear Eastman has good reason to worry about criminal consequences. The attorney-client and work-product privileges must give way if they involve communications that further the commission of a fraud or crime. And Carter found that at least one of the emails did just that.

March 31, 2022

The double standard with Hunter Biden's laptop is worse than you think


(CNN) "Attorney General Garland, do your job -- so that we can do ours," declared an exasperated Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria of Virginia on Monday night as part of her work as a member of the January 6 House select committee. Luria and others on the committee expressed frustration with Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice still not acting on the December 14, 2021, vote by the House recommending criminal charges against former Donald Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows for defying a congressional subpoena.

But the frustration many have with Garland goes far beyond simply the over three-month silence on Meadows. As I hear frequently from listeners to my SiriusXM show, the fact that we don't hear a peep about Garland investigating Trump for his attempted coup to overturn the 2020 election and potential crimes in connection with the January 6 attack on the Capitol is beyond frustrating. And those voices demanding Garland to act will be growing louder given a federal court decision Monday where the judge wrote that it was "more likely than not that" Trump committed crimes given his efforts to prevent the certification of Joe Biden's victory.

While the focus of this case was a request by Trump's former lawyer John Eastman to withhold certain documents requested by the January 6 committee based on claims they are protected by attorney-client privilege, US District Court Judge David Carter laid out a damning case against Trump for his conduct surrounding January 6 -- including potential crime.

As the judge wrote, Trump and his lawyer had "launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history," adding, "it was a coup in search of a legal theory." And in a bone-chilling passage, the judge explained that if Trump and Eastman's "plan had worked, it would have permanently ended the peaceful transition of power, undermining American democracy and the Constitution."

March 31, 2022

January 6 committee sends message to DOJ: Do your job

January 6 committee sends message to DOJ as it recommends criminal contempt charges for 2 more Trump advisers: Do your job


(CNN) Members of the House select committee investigating the insurrection at the US Capitol voiced their frustration with Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice on Monday, as they voted unanimously to recommend two former advisers to former President Donald Trump be referred to the department on criminal contempt of Congress charges.

The message to Garland and DOJ, which has still not said whether it will pursue criminal charges against former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows for defying a congressional subpoena, was clear: Do your job. "This committee is doing its job. The Department of Justice needs to do theirs," committee member Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat, said during Monday's business meeting.

The panel voted to recommend Trump White House deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino and Trump's onetime trade adviser, Peter Navarro, for criminal contempt charges for their refusal to cooperate with the committee's investigation or appear for a scheduled deposition. Virginia Democratic Rep. Elaine Luria said that "the Department of Justice must act swiftly," adding, "I will echo what my colleagues have already said, but more bluntly: Attorney General Garland, do your job -- so that we can do ours."

That message to DOJ was only amplified by committee Chair Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, and Vice Chair Liz Cheney, a Wyoming Republican, casting the committee's probe as a struggle for the future of democracy. Referencing the ongoing invasion of Ukraine in her opening remarks, Cheney warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin's actions remind "us what happens when authoritarians rule."

March 31, 2022

MARTERIA - KIDS (K-PAUL REMIX) (German Synth Wave/Tech House)

Label: Four Music – FOR
CD, Maxi-Single
Country: Germany
Released: 2014
Tech House, Synth-pop

March 31, 2022

Clair Obscur - It'll Be Alright (French Darkwave)

Clair Obscur ‎– We Gave A Party For The Gods And The Gods All Came

Optical Sound ‎– OS.050
CD, Album
Mar 2009
Electronic, Rock
New Wave, Experimental

Profile Information

Gender: Female
Hometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 45,393

About Celerity

she / her / hers
Latest Discussions»Celerity's Journal