Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: dogbyte12
Is he OPH legal consultant to FR Network? Simple question. Not complicated. If it is way off base, I am sure you would love to tell us we are crazy, obsessed, and paranoid, and refute it with facts.

Why do you keep asking Castpaw (who's Catspaw?) these questions? Jim has already stated at least twice that OPH never did any work for FR and that he doesn't know him. I stated plainly in post #648 that OPH offered some pro bono legal advice to the Network when it started up, but soon thereafter we engaged a DC attorney and firm with experience in non profits who is our attorney of record. Since that time, we have not asked OPH for advice and none has been offered.

When you have facts on your side, pound the facts. When you don't have facts on your side, pound the table

892 posted on 10/24/2003 3:57:19 PM PDT by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 861 | View Replies ]


To: Bob J
I stated plainly in post #648 that OPH offered some pro bono legal advice to the Network when it started up, but soon thereafter we engaged a DC attorney and firm with experience in non profits who is our attorney of record. Since that time, we have not asked OPH for advice and none has been offered.

I take you at your word Bob. However, I still think it is important and relevant to know if Chancy is OPH. Again, I accept that he no longer consults for FRN, but do you understand why somebody posting a thinly veiled legal threat, AND who also used to consult with FRN, allegedly, might ethically be compelled to reveal who he is?

That is all. I feel this thread should be pulled in the meanwhile. If Chancy does have ulterior motives, perhaps related to the time he was here under a different name, consulting for FRN, but not for FR or Jim directly, then this is a bad faith effort at intimidating his critics.

I am a neutral observer in this fight vis a vis Florida btw. I was very conflicted by issues on both sides of the case, and do not have strong feelings one way or the other, or more accurately, I do have strong feelings for both sides of the argument.

Chancellor Palpatine was very heavily involved, directly in those threads, and he wrote this thread, which can be construed to be an intimidation effort of those who disagreed with him.

His identity, his conflicts of interest are relevent, IMHO anyways. Until he honestly accounts for himself, I believe this thread is a pernicious effort to curtail anonymous speech, done anonymously, through possibly a second pseudonym. There is some irony involved here.

907 posted on 10/24/2003 4:06:22 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 892 | View Replies ]

To: Bob J
Since that time, we have not asked OPH for advice and none has been offered.

OPH no longer exists. Do you know why? It isn't any of my business but these deflections are worse than you and John jousting with the anti-freepers in their caves.

"When you have facts on your side, pound the facts. When you don't have facts on your side, pound the table"

Well now, Bob, you have the facts. I am sitting on my hands. Do you know why OPH's posts were deleted and do you know what happened to him?

910 posted on 10/24/2003 4:07:34 PM PDT by harrowup (So perfect I'm naturally humble)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 892 | View Replies ]

To: Bob J
(who's Catspaw?)

Ow. I'm a parenthetical statement.

That hurts.

915 posted on 10/24/2003 4:08:51 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 892 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson