Montgomery Blair Sibley and the D.C. Madam Records
Act surprised. John Roberts is a rat and Clarence Thomas....well, remember he's the one who mocked that the U.S. Supreme Court was "evading that one" referring to the eligibility cases against the fraud in the White House.
Since prostitution is illegal, John's faces have been made public by law enforcement around the country here and there. It should be no different in this case except it involves individuals like this: Perhaps a man who is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Exposing him as a DC John might cost him bundles in a divorce or high ranking elected officials or other powerful insiders. That's why Ms. Palfrey was 'suicided".
The names of her John's should be released instead of protected by compromised federal judges. Remember from my last column:
(Incidentally, the judge who turned down Sibley's petition is Judge Richard Roberts of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On March 16, 2016, the same Judge Roberts resigned. The 63 year-old is being sued by a woman who claims Roberts sexually assaulted her when she was 16 years old; Roberts was 27. Roberts says the relationship was mutual consent (a 27-year old with a 16 year old teen) and that the sexual assault allegations are "categorically false". The usual denials just like former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, cutting a deal last October in the hush money cover up over allegations he sexually molested a young boy when Hastert was a high school coach. Hastert's sentencing has been postponed due to health issues.)
An update to that one: It now appears there are 4 new individuals who might step forward with accusations Hastert also molested them as boys.
This is from Montgomery Blair Sibley, who was the attorney for Deborah Jeane Palfrey and keeper of her records:
April 6, 2016
Greetings:
As you asked me to keep you in the loop,here is the latest on the D.C. Madam’s records:
Yesterday, Chief Justice Roberts denied my Application to remove the Restraining Order which prohibits me from releasing the D.C. Madam's Escort Service Records I believe relevant to the Presidential Election. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 22, I am now renewing that Application to Justice Thomas – a procedural second bite at the apple so to speak. I will wait upon his decision – which in the normal course should come by the middle of next week – before taking any further action regarding those Records. The Renewed Application can be found on my blog: http://devvy.net/cgi-bin/dada/
I am scheduled to appear by telephone on the Alex Jones Show – Jeane Palfrey’s favorite radio show– this Friday at 1:00 p.m. (Central Time).
I have reviewed the putative D.C. Madam records released on-line and can state they are not the Records I seek to release. Instead, they appear to be those that I released publicly in 2007 and which were organized into a searchable database by the Brandeis Boys. (http://devvy.net/cgi-bin/
Respectfully, I have sought to answer all your questions, so now I am going to ask you a few of my own: With the Wisconsin Primary now in the books and more Primaries on the horizon:
1. Will the Press begin to “press” Chief Justice Roberts as to why he denied my Application in Supreme Court Case No. 15A1016? Is he a Caesar at the Coliseum turning his thumb up or down as the whim strikes him or does he have to account-through-legal-analysis for his decision to allow my First Amendment Political Speech to be muzzled by explicitly approving the refusal of the lower courts in his administrative jurisdiction to allow me to file my Motion to Modify the Restraining Order? (I trust you know for time sensitive or urgent questions, Reporters can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office at 202-479-3211, press 1).
2. When will the Press begin to “press” D.C. Circuit Court Chief Judge Garland as to why his Court has refused – since March 9, 2016 – to address my Petition which seeks an order directing the District Court Clerk to file my Motion to Modify the Restraining Order. Notably, in Case No.: 16-3007, I requested Expedited Consideration which the Circuit Court also has refused to grant or deny creating in effect a judicial pocket veto without explanation and thus denying me the ability to appeal such a decision. (Such an inquiry can be directed to: Tracy Hauser Scarrow, (202-216-7460) Special Assistant to Chief Judge Garland).
Needless to say, there will be more to follow.
Montgomery Sibley
Also:
BREAKING: GOP “Rule 40b” Makes Brokered Convention Impossible, Only Trump Qualifies to Be Nominee!!
Hogan Gidley: Rule GOP Establishment Wrote to Block Ron Paul Now Prevents Them from Blocking Trump
http://devvy.net/cgi-bin/dada/
"Technically, most of the analysts citing Rule 40 are referring to the current version of Rule 40(b), which sets a certain minimum threshold for candidates at the Republican National Convention. According to this rule, candidates must arrive at the convention with a majority of the delegates from eight states or territories, or else they are disqualified from the first round. In most elections, this is a mere formality because the clear winner of the nomination is well-known before the convention begins, making the convention an extended infomercial for the party and its nominee.
"Of course, there is good reason to suspect the Republican convention will be rather more exciting this year. Gidley noted there is apprehension among front-runner Donald Trump’s supporters that the GOP Establishment will use some “shenanigans” to “steal” the nomination from him at the convention. Among those shenanigans could be changing Rule 40 to bring candidates who don’t meet the established minimum threshold into the game.
"There are two ghosts from the 2012 election haunting the Shakespearean drama of the 2016 primary, and Gidley invoked them both in a single breath: Ron Paul and Mitt Romney.
“This is actually called the ‘Ron Paul Rule.’ The Romney people put this in place,” Gidley explained. “The Establishment hurt Ron Paul, but I think this Establishment rule will actually help Donald Trump.”
"Gidley noted there is no way for one of the last three remaining candidates, Governor John Kasich of Ohio, to win the necessary majority of delegates from eight states. Texas Senator Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) currently stands at seven.
"He further asserted that, contrary to much speculation from pundits, Rule 40(b) technically blocks disqualified candidates from participating in any of the subsequent ballots, which scuttles the notion of denying Trump victory in an initial vote where only he and Cruz are qualified candidates, and then parachuting some other Establishment-preferred candidate into the convention hall to seize the nomination, possibly someone who didn’t even run in the 2016 primary at all."
Rest at link - like how the scum bags who control that convention can still change the rules.
--
No comments:
Post a Comment