Dammit, earlier I misremembered one of the 13th Duke of Wymbourne&#039;s <a href="https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=8Z4bTOxYYGY" target="_blank">punchlines</a> as &quot;Whatever were they thinking?&quot;, now I mangled that title. Only thing for it is to get <a href="https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=NPiGJBHVadA" target="_blank">very, very drunk</a>, I guess.
There&#039;s a slight issue with that Connecticut law. Section 9-386c reads:
<i>Misrepresentation of contents of a petition. (a) No person shall intentionally misrepresent the contents of a petition circulated under title 9.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class D felony.</i>
&quot;Misrepresentation&quot; is pretty much Orly&#039;s stock in trade, so this law is clearly discriminatory.
Of course, the people declaring a bullshit designed-to-fail investment to be AAA, and the people selling said bullshit designed-to-fail investment, aren&#039;t the same. It&#039;s just that they have lunch and <strike>snort coke</strike> play golf together, and the latter are paying the former. Completely above board, how <em>dare</em> you suggest there may be any kind of impropriety!
Oh that&#039;s fun, Oily&#039;s facing sanctions <em>in California</em>, where she&#039;s admitted. Ca Bar Soc, are you watching?
Also, too, the fucking law, how does it fucking work? HINT: Probably the exact opposite of whatever Taitz just said.
Hey, O Rly?, you ever hearda this thing called the US Constitution? It has something interesting to say, right there in article I, section 2, clause 5. You might wanna read it.
Yeah, call me back when Taitz has found anything that anybody but her for even a moment believes is provable to any standard, let alone a criminal standard.
Financial cases are notoriously difficult to prove, juries find them extremely difficult to follow, they cost vast amounts of money (and DOJ man hours) to prosecute, and so filing charges is a BFD - no good prosecutor is going to do it without a watertight case.
The fines the banks have agreed to in various settlements do add up to at least several tens of billions, though.
It&#039;s a formality he has to go through before slapping her with sanctions. We saw this song and dance in Georgia, and Orly stepped on Judge Land&#039;s toes badly enough to get her fine doubled. I don&#039;t have Orly down as much of a learner.
Dammit, earlier I misremembered one of the 13th Duke of Wymbourne&#039;s <a href="https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=8Z4bTOxYYGY" target="_blank">punchlines</a> as &quot;Whatever were they thinking?&quot;, now I mangled that title. Only thing for it is to get <a href="https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch\?v=NPiGJBHVadA" target="_blank">very, very drunk</a>, I guess.
Would YOU get close to that Gina Dentata?
And still making a living at it, unfortunately.
It appears that several years ago Orly&#039;s development was arrested.
There&#039;s a slight issue with that Connecticut law. Section 9-386c reads:
<i>Misrepresentation of contents of a petition. (a) No person shall intentionally misrepresent the contents of a petition circulated under title 9.
(b) Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class D felony.</i>
&quot;Misrepresentation&quot; is pretty much Orly&#039;s stock in trade, so this law is clearly discriminatory.
Dave&#039;s not here.
Harpo kept quiet, though.
Long enough to gain be able to answer &quot;What Is Wrong With Kansas&quot;?
<em>Even she</em> realizes that she personally is nowhere even remotely close to having standing.
Of course, the people declaring a bullshit designed-to-fail investment to be AAA, and the people selling said bullshit designed-to-fail investment, aren&#039;t the same. It&#039;s just that they have lunch and <strike>snort coke</strike> play golf together, and the latter are paying the former. Completely above board, how <em>dare</em> you suggest there may be any kind of impropriety!
She would then claim that Obama was a Stalinist, and was committing dissidents to mental hospitals.
Oh that&#039;s fun, Oily&#039;s facing sanctions <em>in California</em>, where she&#039;s admitted. Ca Bar Soc, are you watching?
Also, too, the fucking law, how does it fucking work? HINT: Probably the exact opposite of whatever Taitz just said.
Hey, O Rly?, you ever hearda this thing called the US Constitution? It has something interesting to say, right there in article I, section 2, clause 5. You might wanna read it.
Kansas probably doesn&#039;t have the right dumbass law.
Yeah, call me back when Taitz has found anything that anybody but her for even a moment believes is provable to any standard, let alone a criminal standard.
Financial cases are notoriously difficult to prove, juries find them extremely difficult to follow, they cost vast amounts of money (and DOJ man hours) to prosecute, and so filing charges is a BFD - no good prosecutor is going to do it without a watertight case.
The fines the banks have agreed to in various settlements do add up to at least several tens of billions, though.
It&#039;s a formality he has to go through before slapping her with sanctions. We saw this song and dance in Georgia, and Orly stepped on Judge Land&#039;s toes badly enough to get her fine doubled. I don&#039;t have Orly down as much of a learner.
Given the photographic evidence, my guess would be that Orly wakes up buzzed.