Setbacks For Dan Choi: Judge Denies Use Of Selective Prosecution

A new development has sprung up in the ongoing case related to Dan Choi's arrest in the November 15th, 2010 demonstration at the White House fence, as Judge Lamberth today ruled on the government's attempt to block his legal counsel's proposed defense of selective or vindictive prosecution.  Prosecutor Angela George had previously filed a writ of mandamus barring the defense's use in this case, which Lamberth today acceded to and disallowed the defense in court.

Oh yeah, and I was there too.

From the National Law Journal (via Legal Times):

U.S. District Chief Judge Royce Lamberth, in issuing a writ of mandamus (PDF) to the presiding magistrate judge in Choi's case, ruled that such a defense theory should have been brought up pre-trial. Lamberth also clarified for the first time that a district judge can issue such a writ to a magistrate in the same court, in the same way an appellate court can issue a writ to a district court. 

Choi, a former Army lieutenant who was discharged in 2009 after publicly announcing he was gay, was arrested with 12 other demonstrators outside the White House in November 2010. Choi has been a vocal opponent of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the military’s former policy barring openly gay servicemembers.
The other protestors resolved their cases through a deferred-sentencing agreement with the government. Choi declined the offer. 

U.S. District Magistrate Judge John Facciola has been presiding over Choi’s trial, which began on Aug. 29. It was halted, however, after prosecutors objected to Choi and his attorneys presenting a defense of selective or vindictive prosecution. 

According to the petition (PDF), Assistant U.S. Attorney Angela George learned shortly before the trial that Choi’s legal team planned to present a selective or vindictive prosecution defense. Such a defense theory, according to briefs, would point out disparities in how Choi’s case was handled compared with his previous arrests for protesting, and also how protestors who had gathered outside the White House were treated in the past.

This ruling represents a significant need for restructuring of the defense's strategy and I can't help but think that Judge Lamberth has acted in collusion with the government to hamstring an important court case with far-reaching implications on issues of free speech.  It is seemingly clear to many that he (and the rest of the protesters present by association with him) were victims of selective prosecution, and Lamberth's ruling provides a disturbing precedent for the government to prosecute demonstrators with extreme prejudice.

VICTORY: Dan Choi Update-- Amid Technical Difficulties

While I would love to give you the news today, I'm having connectivity problems and can't, I'm very sorry to say.  However, I've been able to find this on Facebook from Dan Choi's lawyer, Robert Feldman:

Near as I can tell, the judge has acknowledged that the government is unfairly prosecuting Dan Choi and targeting him for his activism.  Thank God that Judge Facciola has a sense of fairness, even if the government does not.

Yesterday, Choi was on the stand for three hours, as reported by MetroWeekly:

On the stand, Choi said the First Amendment provides for the right of people to petition the government for a redress of grievances, which also, he said, is a moral responsibility of patriotic Americans. Choi responded under questioning by Feldman that he believed his actions were a form of speech, and that the government did not have a right to censor them by arresting him.

At times, Choi raised his voice and spoke in such a tone that he almost seemed close to shouting, especially when asked about his arrest. Under cross-examination by Assistant U.S. Attorney Angela George, he compared the various protests against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to the 1960 sit-in by students in Greensboro, N.C., at a Woolworth’s department store and said he was “insulted” by his prosecution on federal charges. 

“The November 15th arrest is surprising in my mind,” Choi said, comparing the tactics used by police officers to remove him from the fence and transport him to the police wagon to procedures taught to soldiers in war. Choi said his left arm had been twisted and he could not feel his index finger for two weeks afterward, statements he said were reinforced by videos showing his arrest.

 I'm not a legal expert, but when I looked up "writ of mandamus" I found the following definition:

Mandamus is a judicial remedy which is in the form of an order from a superior court to any government subordinate court,corporation or public authority to do or forbear from doing some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do or refrain from doing, as the case may be, and which is in the nature of public duty and in certain cases of a statutory duty.[2] It cannot be issued to compel an authority to do something against statutory provision.

I'm not entirely certain what this means as pertains to the case but I'll take Robert Feldman's word for it:  Congrats to Dan Choi on this legal victory.

Dan Choi Trial Update

This fascinating tidbit has come out during FireDogLake's coverage of the Dan Choi protest trial:

There were several jaw-dropping moments from the Dan Choi trial today, but none more dramatic than the moment Lt. LaChance of the Park Police admitted he was advised by Solicitor Randolph Myers of the Department of Interior to press federal charges against the DADT protesters on November 15 — three hours before they began protesting.

How much clearer does it have to be that these are trumped up charges specifically targeting our group?  Since the beginning of the case, it was evident to us that the prosecution was exercising a grudge on behalf of the government against Dan Choi and company.  I was unable to attend my first court hearing due to a medical emergency, and the prosecutor immediately asked the judge to issue a warrant for my arrest.  He turned it down, of course.

But really, what is the government trying to prove in this case?  

Dan Choi's Trial Begins

 At the press conference at close of business:  Jim Pietrangelo, Dan Choi, Robert Feldman, and Iana Di Bono.  Photo by Brad Crothers.

Dan Choi's trial began yesterday, continuing the legal battle begun last November when he and twelve other activists (ahem, including me) handcuffed ourselves to the White House fence in protest of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  The twelve of us plead guilty to the charge of "failure to obey," but Dan felt that he was not guilty of a crime and asked for a trial.  He faces six months in prison or a $5,000 fine.

Metro Weekly reports:

Choi’s lawyer, Robert Feldman, said he would try to move quickly tomorrow, but because the prosecution has not rested its case, and because of testimony that implicated other potential law enforcement officers who could be called as witnesses, the trial might spill over into a third day.

The prosecutor representing the government, Angela George, called six witnesses, all U.S. Park Police officers, to testify against Choi. George argued that Choi could be found guilty of failing to obey a lawful order because his conduct could be considered disorderly, or because the group he was involved with did not have a permit to demonstrate on the sidewalk in front of the White House. At the close of the day, George said she had at least one more witness to call before finishing her arguments.

What seems like an open-and-shut case for the prosecution-- after all, we were all on the fence, right?  There's video!-- was called into question by Dan's lawyer, Robert Feldman.  During cross examination, he attempted to establish several key points that seem to erode the government's position that Choi had no right to be there:

On cross-examination, Feldman questioned whether Choi was technically on the sidewalk or a ledge when he was chained to the fence, thereby not disobeying police orders. He also questioned whether Choi’s conduct posed a threat to others, obstructed traffic or prevented emergency responders from doing their job, which would be required for his conduct to be considered “disorderly.” 

 I will be speaking to Dan's assistant later, and will hopefully have more information as the trial evolves.  Feldman, after the trial ended for the day, stated that he believed the trial may last as long as three days.

Footage of the protest below:

 

Bachmann Says Some More Crazy Talk

Looks like Bachmann is starting to try both sides of the gay/anti-gay fence, with a recent interview on "Meet the Press" in which she refuses to address anything gay at all, instead bizarrely reiterating over and over that she is running for President:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Thanks Michele, for this exercise in pointing out the effing obvious.

However, evidently when she's not talking to MSNBC she feels perfectly comfortable talking about taking rights away from LGBT Americans, stating for CNN that she would "probably work" towards reinstating Don't Ask, Don't Tell:

But Bachmann, a favorite of the ultraconservative Tea Party movement, said she would revisit the policy if she reaches the White House. 

"The 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy has worked very well," she told CNN's "State of the Union." 

"I would be in consultation with our commanders, but yes, I probably will" reinstate the ban, she added. 

The ban was overturned in a law adopted in December 2010 that first required the top military officer, the defense secretary and the president -- who is also commander-in-chief -- to certify the change would not harm military readiness and that the armed forces were ready to carry it out.

I asked a friend, Jarrod Chlapowski, who is the Field and Developmental Director of Servicemembers United, what he thought on any efforts on the part of an imaginary Bachmann administration to hash this battle out again:

"Politics aside, I think any executive would have a difficult time reinstating any sort of gay ban in the military, let alone DADT. The public overwhelmingly is in favor of open service. The training is done; the honey is out of the comb. And the last thing any of the service chiefs want is to deal with an extended media spectacle over a reversal that would be unnecessary, harmful, and pure political theater."

Servicemembers United, you may remember, was involved in a landmark court decision ordering a halt to gay discharges, with their Executive Director Alex Nicholson being the plaintiff in the case.

I have a little bit to add to this, as I myself have been involved in the push to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell.

Last November, I joined Dan Choi and 11 other patriots in standing up for what we believe in.  We went to Washington DC and chained ourselves to the White House fence in order to put pressure on the administration to back full repeal of DADT.  Did we make repeal happen?  I don't know that.  But I do know a month later repeal happened in an unprecedented push for equality in Congress, and I feel confident claiming my part in that narrative.

This in mind, I would like Michele Bachmann, in all her political theater and insane grandstanding, to consider this:  If you reinstate DADT, I'll be back.  I don't care how many times I have to chain myself to that fence, I will be back, and you will be in for a long, pain-in-the-ass ordeal and media extravaganza.

Do you really want this on your doorstep?

When I took the fence with my comrades-in-arms, America paid attention.  Do you want that level of scrutiny on your anti-gay politics?  Your recent interviews, essentially refusing to address your anti-gay past, would indicate you don't.  So don't screw this up for yourself, Michele.

Because we're watching you, and handcuffs really aren't that expensive.

DOMA Is Still Alive, Folks

If you have any doubt that there needs to be a lot more work regarding the benefits of marriage for LGBT Americans, look no further than here.

Even though DOMA has seen a decided lack of support from the Administration in recent weeks, one couple still feels the pain of its oppressive policies.  Bradford Wells and Anthony John Makk, who have been together for 19 years and married 7 years ago in Massachusetts, are now slated to be separated as deportation proceedings have been completed against Makk.  He is going to be shipped back to his native Australia, which is doubly sad as he is his husband's primary caregiver.  Wells suffers from AIDS, and Makk's absence is sure to have an impact on his health.

And what is the immigration authorities justification for deporting Makk?  That's right, you guessed it!  The Defense of Marriage Act.

"Bradford Wells, a U.S. citizen, and Anthony John Makk, a citizen of Australia, were married seven years ago in Massachusetts. They have lived together 19 years, mostly in an apartment in the Castro district. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services denied Makk's application to be considered for permanent residency as a spouse of an American citizen, citing the 1996 law that denies all federal benefits to same-sex couples.

"The decision was issued July 26. Immigration Equality, a gay-rights group that is working with the couple, received the notice Friday and made it public Monday. Makk was ordered to depart the United States by Aug. 25. Makk is the sole caregiver for Wells, who has severe health problems.

"'I'm married just like any other married person in this country,' Wells said. 'At this point, the government can come in and take my husband and deport him. It's infuriating. It's upsetting. I have no power, no right to keep my husband in this country. I love this country, I live here, I pay taxes and I have no right to share my home with the person I married.'"

While I blog frequently about marriage equality, I never really felt exceedingly passionate about the struggle for gay couples to get married in this country.  I often felt that ENDA and the repeal of DADT were far more important to LGBT Americans.  In fact, when I get married in March, it will most likely not be a legal ceremony.  Adam and I are happy just confirming our love to each other in front of friends (though Dan Choi, our officiant, recently got ordained just in case).  However, for bi-national couples, the right to get married is an important one and extremely necessary to stay together.

Fred Karger Wants To Play, Too!

Fred Karger is like the Little Engine That Could-- no matter how steep that climb to the White House may seem for the gay Republican candidate for President, he just keeps on tryin'.

His latest obstacle is Fox News.  He is trying his damnedest to participate in the Presidential debates being televised on America's "Fair and Balanced" news network, but appears to be black-balled due to the fact that no-one seems to know who he is.  He recently sent out an e-mail celebrating that he met the minimum poll requirements to take part in the debate, but Fox News is invalidating his candidacy, stating that the poll data is from online questionnaires and doesn't really count.


So what recourse does Fred have?  I know!  A Change.org petition!

Both Dan Choi and myself have signed this petition asking Fox News to allow Fred Karger to participate in the debate.  Why?  Not because I think he has an icicle's chance in hell of being selected as the GOP candidate for President.  I believe that the more dissenting ideas in the movement there are, the more discussion we have, and the greater chance we have of coming up with real solutions.

Plus, having a queermo gaylord up on stage with Michele Bachmann really tickles my pickle.  So sign!

Click here!

Dan Choi Reports From Amsterdam

Dan Choi spent the weekend hootin' it up with the Amsterdam gays for their Pride celebration, being included in their "parade"-- a flotilla of gaylicious Pride floats chuggin' down the canals of the Netherlands' largest city.

Dan never misses an opportunity to dress up.

"This weekend, in front of half a million Dutch families and revelers, the Amsterdam Gay Pride parade showcased a truly historic statement: 85 gay (including 2 transgender) servicemembers in full dress uniform with Dutch Defense Ministry officials in the first ever sanctioned military gay pride contingent. Three active duty gay generals were with us on the uber-gay float. We were literally floating, too: the canals that line the city of Amsterdam, built in the 17th century, were our parade route. Lots of saluting, lots of cheering, lots of dancing… lots of 'IN THE NAVY' blasted over and over and over again. (Did you know the song was originally owned by US Navy Recruiting? …hat-tip: Michael Bedwell)

"British Lieutenant Commander Mandy MacBain, Chief Diversity and Inclusion officer for the Royal Naval Service joined me in officially opening 'Canal Pride 2011' with an appropriate theme: 'All Together Now.' In spirit of cooperation we held the scissors together while cutting the pink boa held by leaders of PRO-GAY, the group organizing the parade. Her partner Joanna joined us on the boat, and the three of us comprised the foreign contingent. They set up flags for us near the back of the boat but by the time the parade kicked off, the soldiers pushed us to the front, to stand with their generals. This was quite an unexpected honor."

Dan also celebrated our President's birthday with a cake baked by the Democrats Abroad:

Let him eat cake.

Jane from FireDogLake has his whole account of the trip, click on over.  Dan even got flipped off by an anti-war Niederlander!  What luck.  I would have gone (the Dutch Ambassador was just screaming for my attendance) but I was clearly far too busy playing Battlestar Galactica Online to be in his boat thingy.  Whatevs!  

Obama Supports Repeal Of DOMA, Hearings Begin Today

During my time off yesterday, the President made big news by stating his support for the Respect for Marriage Act, a proposed piece of legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act entirely.  The Congressional hearings are ongoing at the time of this writing (click here to go to ThinkProgress and watch the statements).

From Pam's House Blend:

"This would repeal ALL of DOMA:

* The federal definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman;
* The section that allows states not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states;
* The federal government prohibition from recognizing legally performed same-sex marriages."

The author of the bill, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) had this to say:

"I am thrilled by President Obama's endorsement today of the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation which I introduced in order to repeal the discriminatory and cruel Defense of Marriage Act once and for all. "The President's unprecedented decision to support this timely legislation sends a powerful message to Members of Congress and to the American people that now is the moment to dispense with DOMA and remove this ugly blight from our legal code. The President has consistently supported repeal of DOMA and, with today's announcement, in advance of tomorrow's landmark Senate hearing, he has taken yet another step to make this a reality. On the heels of New York's advancement of marriage equality last month, the Respect for Marriage Act is more necessary than ever to ensure that all legally married couples are treated the same - and granted the same recognition - by the federal government."

Many, like Nadler, are lauding the President's support for the Act as historic, as the White House rarely comments on bills before they hit the floor for debate and voting.  

Some aren't so happy, however, criticizing the President's support as poor timing and bemoaning the chances of the bill actually passing, with famed activist Robin McGehee taking to Twitter to sarcastically thank Obama:

In related news, my online action with Dan Choi criticizing HRC for taking up space in the hearings that would better be given to people of color or bi-national couples got coverage on the Washington Blade and Towleroad, with Christopher Edwards of Immigration Equality responding to the petition I created:

"Christopher Edwards, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said Leahy is a 'huge champion' of UAFA and bi-national families and maintained Immigration Equality has 'a very positive relationship with him and his office.'

"'There are a large number of issues related to DOMA that not all of them could be or should be represented,' Edwards said. 'We at Immigration Equality are fully supportive of the witness list for the hearing, and we know our couples and families will benefit from the hearing and the testimony of the witnesses chosen.'"

I would say your "positive relationship" isn't taking your cause very far if you can't even arrange to have a single black person testify for marriage equality.  I don't care about your positive relationship, I care about making an effective impact and getting this bill passed.

Dan Choi: "Tell HRC To Abandon White Privilege"

Dan Choi and I got really angry yesterday and decided to make some noise about it.

This week, on the 20th, Congress will be holding hearings to get testimony on the possible repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.  While this is a great occasion and the beginning of the process to bring marriage equality to every LGBT American, Dan noted on his Twitter that all the folks providing testimony (to include Joe Solmonese) are uniformly white.

We felt that the exclusion of gay people of color and binational couples was an outrage, and we feel that the fact that HRC's leadership is racially homogeneous (rich white gay men) tends to promote that image and give white members of our community an advantage.  The fact that binational couples (who are hugely impacted by the lack of marriage equality in our country) are not present in testimony is insane.  If Joe Solmonese, for instance, were to give up his spot to a binational couple that had a powerful story to tell, the case for marriage equality would be made in simple terms of an appeal to common sense and decency.

Instead, he's going to join Maggie Gallagher in his photo op.

So we started a Facebook page and a Change.org petition telling HRC to abandon white privilege and promote the true image of our community: a rich, diverse group of people from all ethnicities and nations.

I've already gotten some flack for my small efforts.  Some detractors (who are also friends) argue that HRC doesn't deserve our ire-- after all, they don't schedule who speaks at congressional hearings, congresspeople do!  However, consider this: is the leadership in our community really doing the best they can to include every facet of our various backgrounds?

HRC is very much responsible for how much of Congress and the straight world view us.  Like it or not, they are the most visible organization to everyone else, and I for one will urge them to use that visibility positively and abandon racism to include all Americans in this discussion.

Will you join me?  Like our Facebook page and sign this petition.  Tell HRC that our rainbow includes every color possible, and we would like people to know and understand that.

Dan Choi Responds To Glitter Debate

One of the nice things about Netroots is you get to corner famous people and get quotes from them.

I asked Dan Choi how he felt about glittering, and he responded as follows:

"Glitter makes anything more joyous, celebratory and fabulous. The gentle 'Glitter-Bombings' we have seen recently are non-harmful, non-threatening, non-lethal and non-violent manifestations of immense fabulousness. Furthermore, it is an organic and heartfelt statement that increases the joy of all people endowed with a sense of humor. It also brings attention to the dearth of joy in the hearts of the offended parties. I hope we see more of it, for in these times we should share laughter more often, not less often, and I look heartily look forward to any attempts by my critics to glitter-bomb me, so long as they also agree to share a drink with me. Fabulousness would be had by all."

He's not sharing my hotel room if they do at next Netroots, that's for damn sure.  That shit gets everywhere.  

Dan Choi Confronted By OFA Activist, Thoroughly Pwns Him

Netroots isn't short of excitement, especially when Dan Choi is involved.

The third panel I attended today was a high profile get-together of Dan, John Aravosis of AmericaBlog, Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake, and Felipe Matos, a DREAM activist.  The title of the panel, "What To Do When Your President Isn't Into You," described perfectly the tone of the presentation.  Essentially: what do communities do when candidates seek their stamp of approval but balk on delivering the goods?

Dan gave a stirring testimony, declaring that the DNC "has been more divisive than any other political force in the history of gay politics."

However, the highlight of the panel was when one of Organizing for America's activists approached the stage and attempted to hijack the conversation in order to swing opinion positively towards the President.

He made one mistake.  Handing over an informational card to John, which was quickly appropriated by Choi, the OFA rep made the mistake of saying that he was not for same-sex marriage.

"I can't say that I'm for marriage equality, as a bisexual,"


"You say you're not for marriage equality?" asked Choi.

"I can't, as, uh..."

Choi ripped the card in pieces and scattered it on the stage, waving away the young, bumbling activist.

"Do you not understand? I believe I'm an equal citizen."

I'm not embarrassed to say I leapt to my feet, applauding.  

State Department Reacts To Choi's Arrest

Titled "Concern About Freedom of Assembly In Russia," the US State Department has issued a statement in support of the movement to hold Pride in Moscow.

"We note with concern that in Moscow on Saturday, May 28, a peaceable demonstration of Russians advocating for the rights of gays and lesbians, joined by international supporters, was forcefully disrupted by counter-protesters, and that Russian security forces then detained people from both groups, including American citizens. Some protestors were seriously injured according to media reports.

"Freedom of assembly is a fundamental right all members of the OSCE committed to, including in the Moscow declaration and as recently as the Astana summit. As nationwide legislative elections approach, constraints on the ability of Russian citizens peacefully to gather and express their views will be closely watched in evaluating the integrity of the electoral process.  We call on Russian authorities to work with municipal officials to find better ways to safeguard these fundamental freedoms."

Lacking?  Anything from Hillary Clinton.  Also, Dan reminds us, through Pam Spaulding, about the second half of LGBT:

John Aravosis from Americablog had a few more things to say, one point being that the statement neatly avoids the accusations of collusion between security forces and Neo-nazi elements present at the protest.  Click on over for his analysis.

France also released a statement:


"VIOLENCE AT THE GAY PRIDE PROTEST IN MOSCOW (May 28)

"With regards to the violence that took place May 28 at Gay Pride in Moscow, France reaffirms its commitment to freedom of expression for all and the right to peacefully demonstrate in safety.

"We remind all that the European Court of Human Rights ruled in its decision of 21 October 2010 that the ban on this year's Moscow Gay Pride is contrary to Article 11 of the European Convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms.

"France reiterates its condemnation of violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms based on sexual orientation or gender identity, regardless of the country where they are committed."

Dan Choi Arrested In Moscow

Dan Choi participated in a banned Pride rally on Saturday in Moscow.  Pam from Pam's House Blend captured Choi's Tweet feed related to the event:

15 Russian activists and 3 internationals were arrested in the demonstration after an unknown number of anti-gay "fascist" attackers started a fray.  Andy Thayer says:

Video of the chaotic scene.

"By our count, 18 pro-lgbt demonstrators were arrested today (15 Russians and 3 internationals), as were an unknown number of fascists who tried to attack us.  A fascist tried to slug me in the face, but missed.  One of our Russian friends was injured and taken to the hospital, but not in serious condition.  We were very worried that the police would simply allow the fascists to beat us to a pulp.  That this did not happen is a victory, of sorts.

"The pro-gay European Court of Human Rights decision is now revealed as a piece of toilet paper, soiled.  The European Court and the Russian gov't look very bad, and President Obama and Sec't of State Clinton look like hypocrites for failing to say anything about the events today.  Before the demo, our Russian friends were told by the U.S. embassy that they would simply "monitor the situation."  Lot of help that was.

"Russian LGBTs unfortunately still have a lot of work ahead of them.  The Russian gov't continues to thumb its nose at world opinion, as does the U.S. gov't in this and many other matters."


The three internationals were Choi, Louis-George Tin and Peter Tatchell, all of whom were released immediately without a fine.  The Russian activists had to stay overnight.  The Advocate reports that the treatment of the foreign activists was much better, as they were even allowed to keep their cell phones in their holding cells.  

UK Gay News liveblogged the event, found at the link below.

[UK Gay News]

Video: Dan Choi, Speaking In Support Of Russian LGBT Rights

An excerpt:

"I am here in Russia, solidarity with our brothers and sisters who are fighting for the basic right to express their identity. Here, it's on such a basic fundamental level of living a life of truth and integrity. I am proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. This is a different kind of battlefield than all the battlefields I've seen."

Dan is in Russia for the weekend in order to demonstrate in solidarity with Muscovite LGBT activists in their banned Gay Pride celebration.  More details as it develops.


Watch:

Video: Dan Choi In Moscow

As an update to today's earlier post, video has been released courtesy of Andy Thayer of Gay Liberation Network and Pam Spaulding:

Dan Choi: Making Trouble In Moscow

Every year, gay Muscovites attempt to hold a Gay Pride event and every year the city bans the event from taking place, once memorably referring to Pride as "Satanic."  This year is no different, however, American gay rights activist Dan Choi has flown to Russia in order to show support for Russian activists combating homophobia in Moscow.

Along with Russian activist Nikolay Alexeyev, French Louis-George Tim (who created the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia) and British activist Peter Tatchell, Dan reports via Pam Spaulding:

"Dan reports that he, along with about 20 activists from the U.S. and Europe attended Russia's version of Meet the Press. Russian LGBT rights activist, lawyer and journalist Nikolay Alexeyev debated their version of Maggie Gallagher, and the opposition (anti-gay) side was stacked with government officials and a 'sexologist' demonizing LGBTs.

"According to Dan, the first two segments were very contentious; at the end of the second segment it became so heated that Alexeyev stormed off of the set -- actually damaging part of the set -- and refused to come back for the third segment.

"Instead, Alexeyev and all of the pro-LGBT attendees left the set and audience. This program aired live, so I'm sure clips will surface. Dan will have a report later; they are also planning direct action in protest of the cancellation of Pride by homophobic officials and it's likely there will be arrests."

Good job to Dan and Co. on supporting gay rights in Russia.  Good luck this weekend with Pride celebrations.