Did you catch that the source of that image is Q13 News, a Fox TV Channel in Seattle??? ROTFLMAO!
Oh, and yes, thats a missile. alrighty!
Posted on 07/25/2018 10:10:41 PM PDT by ransomnote
I’m thinking that regardless of sex a percentage of Freepers here are going to demand some sort of suitably anonymized photographic evidence... :-)
Mark
The Alan Q was referring to in Drop 1132 was Alan Dershowitz who had just published an opinion piece slamming the Mueller investigation's basis for even existing, due to no underlying crime being charged in its commission by Rosenstein as required by law, and there being no such Federal statutory crime on the books as "collusion."
It is not this guy, no matter what he claims.
The Alan Q was referring to in Drop 1132 was Alan Dershowitz who had just published an opinion piece slamming the Mueller investigation's basis for even existing, due to no underlying crime being charged in its commission by Rosenstein as required by law, and there being no such Federal statutory crime on the books as "collusion."
It is not this guy, no matter what he claims.
Did you catch that the source of that image is Q13 News, a Fox TV Channel in Seattle??? ROTFLMAO!
Oh, and yes, thats a missile. alrighty!
Shown on Q13 News, to boot. Something for the OraQle.
Swordy, I remember that. Don’t know what to think of this Alan Q guy either. Q said be careful who we follow.
For one, she hasn’t been charged and tried for anything yet...
Yet...
Nope—context is everything—MH is Peter Strzok's cuckolded wife, Melissa Hodgman. On October 14, 2016, Hodgman was promoted to deputy director of SEC’s Enforcement Division, literally just two days after the FBI was notified on October 12, 2016, by New York Police Department that hundreds of thousands of the supposedly missing Hillary emails, many of which were relating to the Clinton Foundation (as well as her duties as Secretary of State) were found on Anthony Weiner’s Apple Laptop. Strzok had been the primary agent on that investigation as well. . . yet he delayed retrieving the laptop for several weeks after being notified.
Yeah that’s great.
The Deep State has control of the on-air fines and ultimately re-licensure of their affiliates. . . plus they are creatures of advertising and their corporate owners.
They may know exactly what Q is saying and even be red pilled, but look to Roseanne to see the ultimate results of the wrath of their corporate owners. Her show was Number ONE in the ratings, yet that did not stop the network from deep fixing it despite the ratings!
They are not rational. They WILL pluck out their eye if it offends them, consequences be damned!
The conservative talent know this and walk a very precipitous tightrope. They can only say just so much without triggering that corporate/advertisor wrath and backlash.
Excellent analysis Jack. . . just add that all of these people are under the control of corporations and advertisers and you’ve got it covered.
That is patently a false statement. In fact, the entire case against Arthur Anderson was overturned in a landmark 9-0 US Supreme Court Decision, due to there being NO CRIME! The "Special Prosecutor", which included some of the same people and tactics being used in the Russia probe today, made up the crime, which did not exist! Out of a world-wide accounting firm with 85,000 employees, perhaps twenty were involved with the Enron account, and THEY were unaware of the unethical, but NOT illegal actions of the Enron Board of Directors in allowing their CFO'S close dealings with two entities IN which HE HAD MAJORITY INTEREST.
In fact, the special prosecutor issued immunity to the leaders of Enron to instead go after four mid-level managers of Merrill Lynch for what became known as the Barge tax deal, involving a mere $6.78 million in which a profit of less than $700 was booked over a six months period long before the Enron collapse. . . during which, it turnout, the prosecutors suborned perjury, hid exculpatory evidence, manufactured false evidence, refused "Brady disclosures" they knew about to the defense, unconstitutionally actively conspired to hide the Brady evidence, lied numerously times to the judge about the Brady evidence, ran defendants into bankruptcy, over-charged offenses (sound familiar?), and threw white collar "Indictees" into solitary confinement to force confessions from innocent men, named everyone in sight as "unindicted co-conspirators" under threat of being indicted if they testified for, or even talked to, the defense, got the judge to refuse baii, and demanded ridiculously long sentences of up to 37 years for "crimes" the accused did not even have a material gain from committing.
The prosecution's novel theory was that these four men had essentially embezzled fund from Enron by "depriving Enron of the fair value of the services" of Enron's CEO and CFO in doing this ~$7 million barge deal with them. This, illogically, ignores the fact that Enron's CEO and CFO approached Merrill Lynch with the barge proposal in the first place! There also is no such "crime" as illegally depriving another company of its employees time unless one BRIBES them. There was no bribe alleged. Ergo, no crime on Merrill Lynch's part. Zip. None. It was a standard business transaction. . . and so the 5th circuit ruled!
After all was said and done, the convictions of the four Merrill Lynch employees had all their convictions reversed except two counts, the convections of two counts for Dan Brown for lying to a Grand Jury about his understanding about the content of a phone call in which he was not even a participant, and the obstruction of justice for that claimed perjury. . . but he was told in the GJ hearing to answer the question, even if it was just his opinion, right or wrong (one appellate justice wrote even those were not crimes and were in fact based on truthful statements and should be reversed, but the two liberals on the panel overruled him)! There is no way to lie about one's opinion—but that was what he was convicted of doing—add also that Brown was on record as opposing that Merrill Lynch even enter into the deal with Enron!
Those were the ONLY convictions left standing out of the over $150 billion Enron failure. . . and it was later found that Brown's opinion was TRUE! He did not lie. . . but he's left with a felony record.
Again, there was no underlying crime for the prosecutors to ever bring the cases in the first place! The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals threw it all out! And the real crooks were given immunity so the prosecutors could go after inconsequential made up "crimes" that supposedly were committed years before and had NOTHING to do with Enron's collapse. (Again, sound familiar?)
But even THEN, these idiot Federal Prosecutors attempted to RETRY ALL FOUR MEN ON THE SAME CHARGES THE 5TH CIRCUIT HAD DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL! And their idiot pet Federal Judge was allowing it!!!! The defense went to all the expense of preparing for trial when the day before trial was to commence they discovered the prosecutors had not contacted ant of the original witness from the first trial. . . and were unprepared to go to trial! instead they tried to bluff and force plea bargains. The defense refused and the prosecutors folded. . . after eleven years and more than $15 million plus bankrupting all the defendants and DESTROYING Arthur Anderson for something they DID NOT DO!
Read "Licensed to Lie, Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice," by Lyndsey Powell, an ex-U.S. Attorney. One name: Andrew Weissmann. . . He was on the Enron task force and is Mueller's chief of staff. . . he plays dirty.
The reason for their dismal reputation is they were traveling entertainment. There were few towns large enough to support a permanent entertainment class, or the same acts on a repeated basis. They had to move to maintain novelty.
When things disappeared through theft, it was easier to blame the strangers who had just been in town than to blame local talent, and perhaps rightly so. payment for entertainment service was lowly, again because of the reputation of such itinerant movement, and in some areas one still had to pay for room and board above what one could earn. Thievery and prostitution were one way the artistes could make ends meet. The Illusionists and Magicians who did card tricks also get their starts as gamblers (dishonest) and pickpockets. So things DID disappear when such shows came to town.
Another reason for disapproval of such low-lifes is that travelers were a means of disease spreading among villages. Towns were insular and had little contact except for travelers. Any disease would likely appear a few days after the appearance of a band of such travelers/entertainers, especially sexually transmitted diseases.
Is it any wonder that people tended to look down their noses at such "low lifes?"
Excellent post, Swordy. 188% concurrence.
So good, in fact, that I set it to music.
At that time, that was actually good and legal advice, and was not at all "questionable." The point is that all non-final versions of work product do not need to be kept. That would results it tons of useless paper work, for no reason. Today, under the new law that came out of the Enron debacle, it is more important to retain some documents than before, but again not all. major approved, time stamped revisions must be kept, but not works in progress up to the point they receive approval. Monday morning quarterbacking of decisions of in progress work should be avoided by industrial shredding when the final is approved.
The Enron case had prosecutors claiming that ANY destruction of record for any purpose was illegal and actionable. The prosecutors argued that somehow a person should know that someday, somewhere some government action, criminal, civil, or regulatory, might demand to see that document and destroying it is therefore an illegal obstruction of justice even if there is no case pending or contemplated! The US Supreme Court (IIRC) disagreed with their interpretation of the law and slapped them down.
See "Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice", Sydney Powell. 2014.
The D5 Nations are already in the LexiQon. . . the Anons are late to the game. :^)
Those have nothing to do with whether the President can unseal anything in an administratively sealed application. Those placing the redactions have done so by using authority which devolves from the President. HE is the source of all authority in the executive branch and their actions cannot over-ride his! Therefore, he can unredact anything.
I could swear that's Elvis talking to Judge Crater seated with their backs to us on the right. . .
Blush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.