The Post and Email

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9901

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat May 12, 2018 12:15 pm

Trump hasn’t cut Rondeau’s welfare payments yet so he’s still okay



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9902

Post by bob » Sat May 12, 2018 12:17 pm

P&E: Presidential Eligibility and Senate Resolution 511 (2008):
Joseph DeMaio wrote:“A STATUTE…CANNOT AMEND THE CONSTITUTION”

It always pays to read The P&E daily for updates on the presidential eligibility issue. Proof of that reality – including for yours truly – comes as a result of reading some of the comments which have recently been posted regarding this P&E article suggesting questions which an independent special counsel might hypothetically pose to former presidential usurper Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. The questions, of course, would include addressing his claimed (but counterfeit) bona fides as a purported “natural born citizen” under the Constitution.

Despite the incessant drumbeat from leftist Obot apparatchiks and the mainstream media (forgive the redundancy), the presidential eligibility issue is neither “resolved” nor “settled” as to the guy who claims to have been born in Hawaii. Nor has the issue been resolved with regard to a long list of other individuals who are rumored to be flirting with a run for the presidency, including Messrs. Cruz and Rubio as well as Mss. Haley and Harris.

Specifically, one Alexander Gofen recently posted a comment to the above-cited P&E article referencing “2008 Senate Resolution 511” and its attempt to legitimize the eligibility of one John McCain as a “natural born citizen” when he was running for president in 2008. In that comment, Mr. Gofen notes, among other things, that the resolution purported to acknowledge in one of its several “Whereas” introductory clauses that a “natural born citizen” under the Constitution corresponds (as to John McCain) to a person “born to citizen parents on American soil.” The comment also asserts that this criterion corresponds to that articulated in § 212 of Emmerich de Vattel’s tome, The Law of Nations.

This got your faithful servant thinking: what does S. Res. 511 (2008) actually say? Does the Gofen comment accurately reflect the actual language of the resolution? Full disclosure/confession: your servant had not, until now, actually read the language of the resolution, despite having pontificated at The P&E over the years on the presidential eligibility issue under Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution. My bad.

* * *

Returning to the Gofen comment, as it turns out, the comment closely – but not exactly – tracks the language of S. Res. 511 with regard to the “natural born citizen” issue. The actual language of the resolution on the point is “Whereas [John McCain] was born to American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936….” Thus, the question becomes: does an American military base outside the geographic boundaries of the United States constitute “American soil?”

On the one hand, it can be argued that it should be “deemed” to be American “soil” because American military law governs the activities of military personnel who happen to be present there. Thus, legal “jurisdiction” over the land, being reposed in the United States, renders it American property, at least as to U.S. military citizens present there.

On the other hand, it can be argued that an American naval base such as, say, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba remains situated on Cuban soil because the base exists under a lease between Cuba and the United States. That lease, by the way, provides that Cuba will “retain sovereignty” over the leased premises in perpetuity.

Since a “lease” contemplates that a “lessor” is granting possession of “his” property to a “lessee,” who is permitted to occupy the property, but without “owning” it, this theory would suggest that a person born to American citizen military parents stationed at Guantanamo might not satisfy the de Vatellian § 212 definition of a “natural born Citizen.” This would be particularly so if the Cuban government (some might call it a “regime”) were to claim that the person was, at minimum, a dual Cuban-American citizen. Clearly, the intent of the Founders in providing the “natural born Citizen” restriction in the Constitution was to eliminate dual, shared or split citizenship allegiances in the office of the presidency. A dual citizen does not fit that template. That is another reason why the Founders chose the § 212 de Vatellian concept of a “natural born Citizen” as opposed to the neologism – “natural born citizenship” – concocted by the Congressional Research Service in its various eligibility “products” discussed here.

As for S. Res. 511 and the Panama Canal Zone, assuming, for the moment, that John McCain was born at the Coco Solo Naval Air Station military hospital in the Zone (and not, as some have suggested, at a hospital in Panama City, Panama, which is not and never has been part of the United States), the issue is: was the military hospital located on “American soil?”

At the time of his birth (1936), the Panama Canal Zone was an unincorporated territory under the control of the United States. However, the United States Supreme Court had ruled 35 years earlier that unincorporated territories, even if under the control of the United States, are not, prior to formal action by the Congress, a part of the United States. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901). Thereafter, the Court ruled that the full spectrum of the Constitution’s provisions apply only in incorporated territories of the United States, thereby excluding from that full spectrum its application in unincorporated territories. Rassmussen v. United States, 197 U.S. 516 (1905).

Accordingly, much like the unresolved question of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.’s constitutional eligibility, John McCain’s eligibility remains similarly clouded. While it is unlikely that Senator McCain will again run for president, others similarly-situated might. And while S. Res. 511 may have made a lot of people happy, it provides no satisfactory answers to these constitutional questions. So many issues, so little backbone in the Supreme Court to address and “resolve” them.

In this regard, the more interesting component of S. Res. 511 as to John McCain (and others who might in the future be seen as similarly-situated) lies in the abject nonsense set forth in the fourth “Whereas” clause. That clause reads as follows: “Whereas such limitations [referencing hypothetical limitations contained in the third ‘whereas’ clause of the resolution and purporting to ascribe to the Founders a certain intent in restricting the presidency to natural born Citizens] would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ‘natural born Citizen’ clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’s [sic] own statute defining the term ‘natural born Citizen.’” (Emphasis added)

As even first-year presidential eligibility students know, the reference in the resolution is to 1 Stat. 103 (1790). These students also know that the statute did not “define” the term “natural born citizen,” but instead purported to amend Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution by “deeming” children born “beyond sea” to U.S. citizen parents as being “considered” to be “natural born citizens.” To “consider” or “deem” someone so born to American citizen parents “beyond sea” under a statute limited solely to the power of “naturalization” cannot operate to amend Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution and convert that person into something he/she is not. That would require the recognition and validation of an irrebuttable presumption.

As noted here, the 1790 Naturalization Act (1 Stat. 103) – repealed in 1795 (1 Stat. 414), yet still relied upon by many as supporting a more liberalized and relaxed standard of presidential eligibility than that set out in de Vattel’s § 212 and referencing children born “beyond sea” if born to “citizen parents” and “considered as natural born citizens” – does not properly control the analysis.

* * *

Returning to S. Res. 511, since the circumstances surrounding the repeal of the “natural born citizen” component of the 1790 statute in 1795 (1 Stat. 414) strongly suggest that Congress realized – a mere five years after enacting 1 Stat. 103 – that it could not amend the Constitution by a statute, the conclusion is fortified that only a “natural born citizen” fitting the de Vattel § 212 definition was in 1787 originally intended by the Founders.

Accordingly, the reliance by Senators McCaskill, Leahy, Coburn, Webb, Clinton and Obama in 2008 on the language of a statute repealed by Congress 213 years prior to the passage of S. Res. 511 gives new meaning to the term “clueless.” Again, it might have made them “happy,” but it failed to make them correct. Then again, we are talking here about United States Senators, so draw your own conclusions.

One final observation: it would be interesting to trace the chronology of the language of S. Res. 511 to see if the fourth “whereas” clause originated with Sen. McCaskill or whether, perhaps, it was later added on as an amendment by, say, Senator Obama, who, incidentally, was also running for president in 2008. In light of the fact that in 2008 (not to mention today), substantial questions remained as to his actual place of birth – Honolulu, Hawaii; Mombasa, Kenya; or somewhere in Indonesia – the addition of a “whereas” clause purporting to ratify one’s status as a “natural born citizen” under 1 Stat. 103, although born “beyond sea,” might arguably have been thought to benefit Monsieur Obama even more than John McCain… no?

Under that theory, since no one has challenged the U.S. citizenship of Stanley Ann Dunham-Obama, under old 1 Stat. 103, the fact that he might have been born somewhere other than in the United States to a U.S. citizen mother – and thus, purportedly, a citizen “at birth” or “by birth” and, ipso facto, purportedly, a “natural born citizen” – would not be a disqualifier. Aside from the fact that such a scenario would, under a § 212 de Vattel analysis, be a non-starter, in fact, such a theory would dovetail nicely into the deceptive and goofy rationales of the various “products” to be later produced by the Congressional Research Service on the issue.

Hey, the gimmick might even be successfully peddled to a somnambulant Congress and judiciary. Badda bing…, badda boom. Just sayin’….


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9903

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat May 12, 2018 1:35 pm

Wait. Did I take the TARDIS and find myself in 2008 again? :shock:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9904

Post by bob » Sat May 12, 2018 1:52 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 1:35 pm
Did I take the TARDIS and find myself in 2008 again?
All the birthers are using the recent headlines about McCain to rehash Obama: Rondeau, Klayman, Judy, and ....

Like I said: all the birthers.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: The Post and Email

#9905

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Sat May 12, 2018 2:29 pm

bob wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 1:52 pm
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 1:35 pm
Did I take the TARDIS and find myself in 2008 again?
All the birthers are using the recent headlines about McCain to rehash Obama: Rondeau, Klayman, Judy, and ....

Like I said: all the birthers.
You forgot Orly. Otherwise your list is about complete



User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14812
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Post and Email

#9906

Post by Reality Check » Sat May 12, 2018 2:39 pm

I asked myself WhoTF is Joseph DeMaio?

Well I guess he has been around a while. I found he had written several "essays" at the P&E attacking Jack Maskell and the CRS memos on presidential eligibility back in 2011-12. They were all linked in a comment at Obama Conspiracy Theories.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/02/ ... ent-159421

I can't find that he has any credentials to offer anything of value.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9907

Post by bob » Sat May 12, 2018 3:09 pm

Yup, that's DeMaio: a nobody who has been misreading Vattel for years. And Rondeau's happy to Tom Sawyer off the birthering to some willing fool.

DeMaio kind of buried his lede, but he begrudgingly does admit that S.R. 511 doesn't follow Vattel (and, in the process, contradicts Gofen).


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9908

Post by bob » Sun May 13, 2018 2:49 pm

P&E: The New York Times Cautions Journalists to Watch for “Fabrication” of Documents:
“EXTREME CAUTION AND EXTRA TRANSPARENCY”

A May 12, 2018 New York Times article touted by several of its writers on Sunday morning titled “When Spies Hack Journalism” warns journalists to “tread carefully” before releasing leaked documents and information which may or may not be authentic.

* * *

The Times and most other mainstream media outlets have “withheld valuable information” in the form of credible reports of the forgery of not one, but three allegedly government-issued documents bearing the name “Barack Hussein Obama II.”

While one of the “documents” was issued in hard copy by the Selective Service System to FOIA requesters, the other two are in the form of images on a computer screen identified as inauthentic by experts but which Americans have been expected to believe are genuine because the White House and mainstream media said so.

In the case of Obama’s “short-form” and “long-form” birth certificates, The Times and its legacy counterparts have guffawed at, derided, and ridiculed the deliverers of the news that both images show signs of forgery which deserve federal-level investigation.

* * *

Within hours [of the COLB'S 2008 release], the image was declared a poorly-created forgery which only The Washington Times and a handful of other secondary outlets were willing to report.

Instead of using its vast resources to conduct its own investigation, The Times ridiculed Trump as a “birther” and purveyor of a “lie.”

[Soooo much birthering snipped.]
The patented Rondeau pivot.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9909

Post by bob » Sun May 13, 2018 3:47 pm

bob wrote:
Sat May 12, 2018 3:09 pm
DeMaio kind of buried his lede, but he begrudgingly does admit that S.R. 511 doesn't follow Vattel (and, in the process, contradicts Gofen).
Unsurprisingly, DeMaio's article spawned an orgy of comments; best of:
Chris Farrell wrote:I need to re-read this a few times in order to digest it. It appears to me to be outstanding legal work.
I would love to read Leonard Daneman’s analysis of this piece and further read a written conversation between the author of this brilliant article and Mr. Daneman regarding the issues addressed in this article.
Even better, it would be nice if constitutional attorney Herb Titus would as well join in the discussion of the matter that any points of contention might be identified now so that their resolution might benefit the prosecuting attorneys in a military tribunal conducted, let us hope and pray, in the near future in order to hold Mr. Barack Hussein Obama accountable for the criminal usurpation of the office of POTUS that he acheived by fraud and covers up to this day with multiple forgeries, both electronic and print.
Perhaps Sharon Rondeau could hold an Article II ‘Town Hall’ and invite Capt. (Ret.) Pamela Barnett, (author of ‘Never Vetted– ); Dr. Jerome Corsi; Pastor Carl Gallups; former commander of former sheriff Joe Arpaio’s volunteer Cold Case Posse Mike Zullo; Mike Shoesmith of the PNN network; Leonard Daneman; Herb Titus; Dr. Terry Lee Lakin; Joseph Demaio; Atty. Larry Klayman; Lt. Quarles–oh yeah, he’s dead; Loretta Fuddy–oh yeah, she’s dead; a couple/few of the investigative reporters from World Net Daily and of course Joseph Farah.
Look at Breitbart’s recent ‘Town Hall’ in Metairie, Louisiana. I met Ann Coulter there.
Rosemary wrote:I would certainly add to your list Attys. Orly Taitz and Mario Appuzzo.
Alexander Gofen wrote:The author misunderstood my post entirely.

1) I have never claimed as though any senate resolution may act as a law (much less trump the Constitution). Moreover…

2) Even if the Congress passed a law signed by president, such law too must not trump a constitution. If it happens to contradict the Constitution, the Supreme Court must nullify it. In fact, the Congress had made 8 attempts to amend the Natural born requirement way before impostor Obama surfaced up, but they all failed – see the the research of J.B. Williams quoted in my outline http://judeochristianamerica.org/NaturalBornCitizen.htm

3) I brought the 2008 Sen res 511 into discussion only because it rephrased Vattel’s definition “born to citizen parents on the soil”, which inadvertently slipped into this document made and applied for McCain, yet NOT APPLICABLE to Obama! NOT APPLICABLE, yet nobody in the Congress or in the so called “parties” shouted “Bloody murder!”: neither then in 2008, nor up to now. This is grotesque and ugly farce discrediting civilization in itself!

4) All the legal reasoning in this article could be useful for working of the Supreme Court if it wished to hear the case of Obama’s usurpation (but they had sabotaged it all the time). Yet usurpation ought to be stopped without any court and prior to any court. The constitutional unfitness of Obama (as not natural born by his own bio) normally ought to create an avalanche of protests among the opposition party Congressmen, in the opposition party headquarters, and among millions of rank and file party members. Indeed, the then Pres. Bush ought to intervene and at least stop the illegal campaign (until the legal due process). Alas, nothing of the above happened – because this degenerate nation had no opposition party (no less than the former USSR) – and all three branches of the US government had committed treason by enthroning an Unidentified Foreign Operative (UFO) into the highest office of the nation.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9910

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun May 13, 2018 4:19 pm

credible reports of the forgery of not one, but three allegedly government-issued documents bearing the name “Barack Hussein Obama II.
:rotflmao:



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10399
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9911

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun May 13, 2018 7:15 pm

It would seem credible has a VERY different meaning to the authors than it does in my dictionaries.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9912

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun May 13, 2018 7:17 pm

credible = agrees with me



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9913

Post by bob » Sun May 13, 2018 7:22 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 7:17 pm
credible = agrees with me
:yeah:

Rondeau's abuse of the passive voice is exceeded only by Apuzzo's.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10399
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9914

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun May 13, 2018 7:47 pm

bob wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 7:22 pm
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 7:17 pm
credible = agrees with me
:yeah:

Rondeau's abuse of the passive voice is exceeded only by Apuzzo's.
That would be a yes.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9915

Post by bob » Wed May 16, 2018 12:29 pm

P&E: Media Personalities Speculate on Identity of FBI “Mole” in Trump Campaign:
On Monday’s edition of “Hannity,” investigative journalist Sara A. Carter expanded on the theory that an “intelligence source” with ties to both the FBI and the CIA acted as a “mole” to gain inside information on the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.
P&E: House Intel Chairman Will Meet Again with FBI, DOJ Officials on Wednesday:
On Tuesday’s edition of the FNC morning program “Fox & Friends,” House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes appeared in person, telling co-hosts Steve Doocy, Ainsley Earhardt and Brian Kilmeade that testimony by FusionGPS founder Glenn Simpson that a source “within” the Trump campaign provided fuel for the launching of a counterintelligence investigation by the FBI is “truthful.”
P&E: Hannity: DOJ Meeting with House Intel Chairman Rescheduled for “Next Week”:
In his opening statement on Tuesday evening, FNC host Sean Hannity declared during a string of “breaking news” that a meeting which House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence (HPSCI) Chairman Devin Nunes said would take place on Wednesday with members of the DOJ and FBI has been “rescheduled for next week.”
Rondeau's reportage "reporting" is literally her rehashing what she sees on the tee vee.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Whip
Posts: 2670
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9916

Post by Whip » Wed May 16, 2018 1:18 pm

shocked she didn't tie any birping into that.



User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 17033
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: The Post and Email

#9917

Post by RTH10260 » Thu May 17, 2018 5:04 am

bob wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 12:29 pm
P&E: Media Personalities Speculate on Identity of FBI “Mole” in Trump Campaign:
► Show Spoiler
Rondeau's reportage "reporting" is literally her rehashing what she sees on the tee vee.
She and dotus ought to compare notes :lol:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9918

Post by bob » Thu May 17, 2018 11:41 am

P&E: Essay Proposing Constitutional Amendment to “natural born Citizen” Clause to be Published on Friday:
LAW PROFESSOR ADVOCATES RESCINDING “BIRTH-BASED REQUIREMENT” FOR THE PRESIDENT

In an essay scheduled to be published in the Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy on Friday, University of Richmond School of Law Professor Kevin C. Walsh is introducing a “Proposed Amendment to the U.S. Constitution” to the “natural born Citizen” clause pertaining to presidential eligibility.

* * *

As of this writing, there appear to be no congressional sponsors of proposed legislation pertaining to the “natural born Citizen” clause.

In his essay, Walsh argues that the “birth-based requirement that excludes naturalized American citizens from presidential eligibility” should be rescinded. At present, naturalized citizens are not considered eligible to serve as the nation’s chief executive.

The issue of presidential eligibility came to the fore in 2007 when credible reports surfaced stating that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Indonesia or Kenya. Likewise, the Republican contender he eventually faced in the 2008 election, Sen. Jon McCain, was born in Panama; his constitutional eligibility had been questioned in 2000 when he entered the Republican presidential primary but ultimately lost to George W. Bush.

Also in 2007, Georgetown University School of Law Professor Lawrence B. Solum published a paper in the Michigan Law Review discussing, in part, whether or not McCain met the eligibility requirements in which he wrote of the “natural born Citizen” term, “There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.'”[*]

* * *

After the primary season launched, NPR’s Scott Simon wrote a column published at CBS News titled, “Do away with ‘natural born citizen’ clause” based on its exclusion of “talented” naturalized citizens. Six days later, the lead investigator for the five-year Obama “long-form” birth certificate probe which concluded that the image posted at whitehouse.gov is a “computer-generated forgery” opined to radio host Carl Gallups that the Framers had intended to “encapsulate the office of the presidency to be held by only an individual who was protected through the allegiance of having been born on the soil and had allegiance by blood, citizen parents” (6:50 in video).

* * *

A white paper written by CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret) documents the evolution of the Framers’ Article II mandate that only a “natural born Citizen” is eligible to be president and reasons that, based on “natural law,” a “natural born Citizen” as intended by the Framers is “Born in the country of a father who is a Citizen of the country and the mother is a Citizen of the country” (p. 3).
If you want to see Walsh's :yankyank: , here ya go. (I saw Farrar in the comments, and Rondeau's encouraging others to birfsplain the correct meaning of natural-born citizen.)

* For :sterngard: : Yes, Solum revised that in 2010; and, yes, there's already a comment in Rondeau's moderation queue.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9919

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu May 17, 2018 11:47 am

Didn’t I write the good perfesser and get that correction? It’s been so long ago that the details are a bit hazy. Unlike Rondeau I don't relive birferism every day.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9920

Post by bob » Thu May 17, 2018 11:53 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu May 17, 2018 11:47 am
Didn’t I write the good perfesser and get that correction?
A lawyer for the former president did, IIRC.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9921

Post by bob » Sat May 19, 2018 12:21 pm

Whip wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 1:18 pm
shocked she didn't tie any birping into that.
Ask and ye shall receive: P&E: The New York Times Admits FBI Dispatched “Informant” to Trump Campaign:
BUT “NOT TO SPY”

On Friday The New York Times not only conceded that an “informant” was used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to obtain information from at least two Trump campaign aides in 2016, but it also published additional information about the alleged informant.

* * *

The Times’s article, promoted by the publication as well as one of its writers, Maggie Haberman, is titled, “F.B.I. Used Informant to Investigate Ties to Campaign, Not to Spy, as Trump Claims.”

* * *

In response to The Times’s article in its Twitter timeline, The Post & Email tweeted, “And Barack Obama’s ‘long-form’ birth certificate is authentic.”


Rondeau's ineffectual shade throwing (something all serious journalists do) is newsworthy!

And, of course:
Since early 2012, when a former detective working under the authority of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) revealed that his then-six-month probe into the image posted at whitehouse.gov said to be a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s original birth certificate from Hawaii is a forgery, The Times, The Post and all other mainstream media outlets have marginalized the issue, ridiculed the messengers, and toed the line that Obama was “born in Hawaii.”

* * *

Neither The Times nor any other outlet has ever possessed “any evidence” that Obama was “born in Hawaii,” as no hospital will confirm the claim and no “documentation” released by the Obama campaign or White House has been proven to be authentic.

In fact, his “short-form” and “long-form” birth certificates, as well as his purported Selective Service registration form, have all been deemed forgeries by a five-year criminal investigation, something the U.S. media has worked assiduously to obscure.

* * *

At the same time, the “paper of record” ridiculed Trump for having been a “nonstop ‘birther,'” meaning that he questioned the public narrative that Obama was born in Hawaii.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9922

Post by bob » Sun May 27, 2018 6:36 pm

P&E: All Public Forums Should be Open and Uncensored.

It is a "guest editorial," but the irony escaped Rondeau.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9923

Post by bob » Tue May 29, 2018 3:22 pm

P&E: Los Angeles Mother Loses Appeal for Custody Review of Three-Year-Old Daughter:
“I REALLY HAVE NO RECOURSE”

Earlier this month, two appeals filed by an attorney representing “Michelle Robinson” in the Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District in Los Angeles were reviewed, with the court affirming the dependency court’s award of custody to the child’s father and dismissing the other for consequent “mootness.”
This is the dependency case out of the Los Angeles court system, in which Rondeau insists upon using as a pseudonym the former first lady's maiden name.

Rondeau lurves to portray the mother as a victim of the system, but evidence recited in the CACOA's ruling suggests just the opposite:
The record is replete with evidence that Mother, who previously had been convicted of stalking, endangered Kassidy when she harassed her father and grandmother. In a December 2015 incident, Mother double parked her car in the street, leaving the door open, and assaulted Father. Mother left the infant Kassidy unattended in the car, which was blocking traffic, during the attack.

On one occasion, while Kassidy was in her father’s car, Mother swerved her car in front of Father, forcing him to swerve
to avoid her. In a different incident, Mother crossed multiple traffic lanes and blocked traffic to wait for Father, who again had Kassidy in his car, to reach an intersection. When Father approached, Mother veered in front of him; he had to swerve to escape a collision. On another occasion, Mother kept changing lanes on the freeway so that she was in front of Father no matter which lane he used. When Father moved to exit the freeway, Mother nearly collided with another car as she changed lanes in pursuit. Mother also followed the paternal grandmother and swerved toward her car as the grandmother drove Kassidy home after a visit.

* * *

The record reflects a steady stream of express and implied threats by Mother against DCFS staff. On May 10, 2016, Mother sent an email to the social worker then assigned to the case, Shawna Baszille, intimating that she knew where Baszille lived.

She sent an email to Baszille, Bielecki, Love, Contreras, and others in which she complained about Baszille contacting Mother’s other child. The email concluded, “It would be a mistake for CSW Shawna Baszil[l]e to make direct or indirect
contact [with] my children in the future.” Baszille understood this as a threat. Mother disclosed Baszille’s home address to a number of third parties. Mother spoke multiple times about wishing death on Father and on another DCFS employee Nicolle Winbush. Baszille obtained a permanent restraining order against Mother. The court found that in the context of Mother’s direct threats against other DCFS employees, Mother’s repeated reminders that she knew where Baszille lived and her distribution of Baszille’s home address were a threat; and that a reasonable person would be in fear as a result of Mother’s actions. . . .

* * *

On June 24, 2016, Mother told a DCFS social worker not involved in the case to tell Winbush that she planned to “fuck her and her husband up over my baby.” In July 2016 Mother disseminated the home addresses of Bielecki, Love, and other DCFS employees to dozens of email addressees.

In early October 2016 Children’s Social Worker Matz was assigned to the case. On October 31, 2016, Matz monitored one of Mother’s visits at a police station. Mother refused to leave at the end of the visit. The watch commander instructed Mother to leave; she stopped immediately outside the station and attempted to talk through the doors. The watch commander took Matz and Kassidy to the rear of the building, where Mother approached them again. Mother returned to the front of the station only when threatened with arrest. When Matz later left the station parking lot, a vehicle that looked like Mother’s car drove up behind her and blew its horn repeatedly while passing her. Matz believed Mother was the driver and feared for her safety.

On December 16, 2016, Mother sent an email to Matz, Love, Bielecki, Contreras, and Condon, among others, that referred to their “hopefully soon to end miserable lives” and concluded, “I am not threatening you with retaliation, I am guaranteeing it!” Three days later, Mother sent an email to Love, Bielecki, Contreras, and other recipients that included the phrase, “I can’t wait til vengeance is visited upon each of you personally.”

In January 2017, Mother emailed Love, Matz, Bielecki, Contreras, among others, stating that “Every minute of your
miserable ass lives you use to hurt my baby will backfire on you. I promise.” She sent a message to Bielecki, Contreras, Matz, Condon, Love, and others advising that “[before] you bitches burn in hell” they should obey court orders and warning, “I wouldn’t place my life in [the judicial officer’s] hands if I were you.” On January 31, 2017, Mother emailed a group that included Bielecki,Contreras, and Love, “It’s my mission to personally Fuck You all back.” The message ended with “#RevengeIsReal.”

On a social media application Mother posted a drawing of the Statue of Liberty holding a gun and the caption, “The most dangerous place in the world is between a mother and her children.” She posted photographs of Matz, Bielecki, Contreras, the juvenile court referee, and the referee’s family.

On February 19, 2017, Mother sent an email to Bielecki, Contreras, Matz, Sandoval, Condon, and Love, among others, that said, “I am done playing nice with you Mothafuckas while you fuck over and continually to viciously assault my child both emotionally and physically. [¶] There will be NO more Warnings!”

* * *

On April 3, 2017, Mother approached Sandoval in a grocery store near his home. He did not recognize her immediately because she wore sunglasses, but Mother identified herself by name as she shook his hand. She told Sandoval it was a “small world,” said she was winning her case, and then, as she walked away, called him a profane name. Mother walked to a car and then appeared to take photographs of Sandoval. Shortly afterwards Mother sent an email to Sandoval and others in which she told him that she found his conversation with the cashier at the market “quite enlightening.” She wrote, “I remember it as if it were recorded right in the store.” She concluded, “p.s. it would be great to have a photo to memorialize such a fantastic event, wouldn’t you agree?” Sandoval feared for his safety and went to the police.

On April 11, 2017, Mother sent an email to members of the public containing a photograph of Sandoval in the grocery store parking lot and Sandoval’s name, title, and DCFS office, as well as the city in which the store was located.
This is who Rondeau is protecting. And now that Rondeau has foolishly informed everyone about the decision, Rondeau(the serious, objective journalist that she is) could at least refer to the subject by the court's designation (Kimberley D.).


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: The Post and Email

#9924

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue May 29, 2018 3:44 pm

Some jerk :- should call Rondeau's attention to the facts. I'm sure Rondeau would issue an immediate correction.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24427
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#9925

Post by bob » Tue May 29, 2018 3:46 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 3:44 pm
Some jerk :- should call Rondeau's attention to the facts. I'm sure Rondeau would issue an immediate correction.
Some jerk* is effectively baned at the P&E. :crying:

But not on Twitter. Nor Facebook. :-


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”