Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Retired COB

Think about it this way, if the Judge did not order the Rejection, it would have been up to Fiat SOLELY whether or not dealers lost their franchises, and which ones. Some of those dealers had SUCCESSFULLY been in business since the 1920’s!!!!!!!!!!

Dealerships handed down from father to son over decades.

Why would the Judge order this, when NO ONE party to the sale requested it?

A phone call in the night perhaps? Because the Footnote 21 takes legal sworn testimony OUT OF CONTEXT, and that is FRAUD. Gonzalez had the opportunity to correct the “error” if indeed that is what it was with this Motion, but he denied it. And golly look at this... he’s a chief justice now... isn’t that just a coinkidink?

I think not.


7 posted on 02/09/2010 9:43:09 AM PST by Danae (Don't think the Constitution matters? Try living in a country without one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Danae

Weren’t those dealership singled out based on to whom they gave their money to (elections, etc.)???


14 posted on 02/10/2010 12:13:33 AM PST by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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