McCain Does NOT Equal Bush
But the Secret Service detail assigned to John McCain disagrees, which is why they sicced police on an old woman holding a handmade “McCain = Bush” poster at an open-to-the-public campaign rally on July 7, as seen in this recently posted YouTube video.
Warning: the video’s editor went way overboard with his use of the “ominous silent pause for a brief explanation” technique. And while I understand and agree with the grave seriousness of the whole continued-erosion-of-free-speech thing, I also know there’s no point trying to be ominous in a video showing a guy wearing a bright green full-body vegetable costume depicting Bush and McCain as two peas in a pod.But that guy only appears once, just before the first footage of Cindy Kreck, the sign-carrying librarian cited for trespassing (and later due in court). When the videographer interviews her at the end, she asks, “Why would Republicans who voted for Bush find it offensive that a sign says Bush equals McCain or McCain equals Bush? Why is that offensive?”
(Found on Metafilter.)
posted by Jennifer Abel at 9:54 PM
49 Comments:
I think the McCain = Bush crowd just needs to use more math symbols.
How about:
McCain ≈ Bush
or
McCain :⇔ Bush
or
√McCain² = ³√Bush³
That should confuse them for a while.
Was the pea guy kicked out too? "Two peas in a pod" = "≈"
The lady should have stayed down the street and behind the razor wire enclosed "Free Speech Zone" for her own safety. Secret Service Agents can not be held responsible for their reactions to such an obvious threat. After all, anyone using mathematical symbols in a sign must be some kind of foreign terrorist because Real Americans (tm) don't know such arcane things.
Was the pea guy kicked out too?
Dunno; if you check the video, you only get a glimpse of him standing next to the videographer asking the police guy why the woman's being kicked out, and the police said it was at the request of the Secret Service.
Here's a bit of trivia for you.
Answer the following (without cheating with google), what was the original function of the "SECRET Service."
Sounds ominous doesn't it? Why is it so SECRET?
OK - yes it is a trick question in that obviously it was not to protect the president (or presidential candidates).
So what was it? Without cheating. Honor Code and all.
And if you know the answer - final test - see if you can put it into historical context -- which involves a bit of irony.
- Tom
Was the pea guy kicked out too?
If you read some of the comments posted there on YouTube, you find that he says he was not allowed to stay while still wearing his costume. He says that he removed it and then donned it again outside.
==========================
what was the original function of the "SECRET Service."
Without looking it up I can't be sure, but since they work for the Department of the Treasury I'm going to guess that their original function probably had something to do with money or the government mint. Perhaps they guarded gold or currency shipments, or printing plates and coining dies. They are still charged with investigating counterfeiters. Historical context? I have no idea. Were they not the original "revenoors" who collected excise and liquor taxes and busted up whisky stills?
what was the original function of the "SECRET Service."
Did they have something to do with the counting of the votes of the Electoral College? Aw, I'm just gonna google it.
I thought their original function was to make sure money wasn't counterfeit? Which is why they need to arrest the entire federal reserve for flooding the economy with all these useless dollars.
I thought their original function was to make sure money wasn't counterfeit?
You're right more or less. I just looked on Wikipedea and their original function was to investigate cases of countefeiting. And yes, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve are now the largest and worst counterfeiters.
Yes -- you all answered very well.
The Secret Service's original and primary function is to ....... protect the money, the currency, and in the bigger picture --- big banking.
Over 4 decades after its creation--- added to their duties was the protection of the president.
You see the irony there is that there is no single person in the World who presents as big a threat to the currency as the President of the United States.
And should a President ever pose a threat to the currency, well .... who is there to step aside, look the other way etc., at just the right moment?
The Secret Service was created in the immediate aftermath of Lincoln's assassination, which would naturally draw you to the connection between their creation and their current best known function.
But not so - the historic irony.
In the aftermath of large debt of Civil War, Lincoln, in a face-off with the bankers, got fed up and said "screw you," the United States Government does not need to borrow money. The US government can issue its own currency (as per the US Constitution). Well, as history has proven, that is the surest way to get yourself killed.
Before Lincoln, there was Andy Jackson. Luckily - his assassin's two guns both misfired. Jackson killed the charter of the US Central Bank -- which he later described as his greatest achievement, and he was the last US president, as a result, to fully retire and eliminate the national debt -- completely.
So, after Lincoln was killed, the next US President foolish enough to take on the Central Bank (now called the Federal Reserve) was JFK -- as thorough a fiscal conservative as ever existed in that position since Andrew Jackson.
The summer before he was assassinated, he began issuing US Treasury Notes (which would put the Fed out of business and eliminate our debt)(precisely what Lincoln was prepared to do). He did so via a Presidential Order.
The very first thing that LBJ did after being sworn in on the plane was to rescind that Order (I guess he wanted to live.)
I'll never forget my reaction of puzzlement in first hearing as a young lad that the SECRET SERVICE, in addition to protecting the president, has this money function? What's the connection there I thought?
Simple. They protect the money. And should a US President ever get in the way of that, well .... they are in a position to take care of business.
Thomas Jefferson said that if the US ever resorts to European central banking ... it would be the ruin of our country.
Woodrow Wilson - who was suckered/pressured into permanently establishing the Federal Reserve -- later said that, as a result, he had completely and permanently ruined the country.
All the FDR banking protections have been completely undone in the last ten years.
The last time the economic fate of the Country was completely in the hands of the Federal Reserve, the US had the great depression and the biggest transfer of wealth in our history. Well guess what's happening right now.
Simple. They protect the money. And should a US President ever get in the way of that, well .... they are in a position to take care of business.
That's a lovely tinfoil hat you're sporting there. Simply smashing. Goes so well with your black helicopter spotting field glasses.
Oh - you're probably right Caveman, if you like to believe in coincidences.
But setting the the coincidental and speculative nature of how they were given the role of protecting the President, when their original job had always been to protect the currency (i.e. - central banking debt currency) and the coincidental troubles of Presidents who wanted to shift from debt notes (look at your dollar bill - "federal reserve note") to non-debt notes (US treasury notes) .... setting aside all of that .... it doesn't change what central banks are, how they function, and how it affects economies.
It doesn't change what Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson (belatedly), and JFK understood about this very complex topic.
But in having a job where I take on the biggest financial companies in the World in financial fraud cases and taking on their behemoth law firms, I have come to learn over the years a little bit about how these institutions actually operate - in conjunction with their supposed regulators -- the SEC, which is attempting to cede powers to the Fed right now.
And few people seem to know this. The Fed is not a government institution. It's a group of Banks.
Do you really believe that banks operate in the first instance out of a concern for the public welfare? Do you think that's why the Fed bailed out Bear Sterns - guaranteed it's debts - so JP Morgan could pick up its assets without risk?
Hey let me worry about these guys - you can worry about the cops - division of labor and all. : )
- Tom
Do you think that's why the Fed bailed out Bear Sterns - guaranteed it's debts - so JP Morgan could pick up its assets without risk?
Nope, it's because our government has long since been perverted by special interests and crony capitalists. "Privatize the profits; socialize the losses." If a bank is stupid enough to loan out billions of dollars to people without even bothering to see if they have the assets to pay back the loan, the bank should fail, rather than be bailed out by the taxpayers.
I have come to learn over the years a little bit about how these institutions actually operate
A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Especially when filtered through your paranoia and delusions... To paraphrase Sigmund Freud "sometimes a coincidence is just a coincidence"
If a bank is stupid enough to loan out billions of dollars to people without even bothering to see if they have the assets to pay back the loan, the bank should fail, rather than be bailed out by the taxpayers.
Well that's the way it is suppose to work - Jennifer - as you describe. In fact, that's how it did work - pre - Federal Reserve.
But these bad loans where not made out of "stupidity." They were made by design. They were bundled up ("securitized") and then sold to investors as a bond of sorts. The sellers did very well. It was a major fraud. The mortgage lenders did not have to worry about the risk, because they were selling it away. That's why they were loaning money to anyone and everyone. When confronted with his knowledge of this fraud, former Fed Chairman Greenspan said that he suspected as much, but it was not within his jurisdiction to take action. (When I heard him say that on 60 Minutes - it took my awhile to stop laughing.)
So these time-bomb mortgages ended up over at the brokerage houses, and the ones holding too many of them when the music stopped playing - like Bear Sterns - are the ones in trouble. And now the Fed umbrella, which for over 50 years only covered the banks - is being extended to the brokerages as well. This is being rationalized, in part, because the wall between depository banks and brokerage firms, which was put up after the 1929 crash, was recently torn down again.
The ultimate commodity and the ultimate power - is information. Now the Fed will have access not only to the books of all the banks - but the books to all the brokerage firms as well. If you were to look up who then, as key members of the Federal Reserve, have access to this information, well ...
Now the SEC, the protector of and guardian against the misuse of insider information, should be defending its turf here, but it's not. Former SEC Chairmen are aghast, but it's OK with Bush's guys.
And this all happens after the SEC's former biggest critic and the watchdog of the watchdog, Spitzer, got caught with his pants down, when his banking records were conveniently handed over to the Feds (prosecuting prostitution???) under the guise of keeping a watch out for suspicious money transfers that might be to fund terrorism. : )
But that's probably a coincidence - eh Caveman?
- Tom
Sometimes stupidity is a far better explanation than conspiracy. I suspect this is one of those cases.
Most of the politicos out there have a teenagers outlook on their political careers. They figure nothing bad will happen to them, it will all happen to the other politicos. So they go full speed ahead like a teenager with his first car, all fired certain that they will be the one to come out smelling like a rose.
You don't have to see a black helicopter behind every ominous cloud.
You talk as though Spitzer's stupidity and the concept of pay-back by all the very, very powerful people whose toes he stepped on are mutually exclusive.
The question is - did someone in a position to do so help bring down Spitzer for reasons outside the scope of normal law enforcement? The evidence is pretty damn good that this is what happened - Caveman.
Nixon was stupid in his handling of Watergate. But it was the #2 guy at the FBI feeding info behind the scenes, who enabled two rookie reporters to push through with the story, where the entire veteran print and TV news media could not.
Maybe you believe that it was a coincidence that the US attorneys who were fired by Gonzalez all had political shortcomings from the Admin's viewpoint? According to the Admin, it was all a coincidence.
I guess I am a little more jaded or skeptical when it comes to coincidences in certain arenas. In my investigation of financial fraud cases, more often than not, what are claimed to be coincidences are not - they are fraud.
Hey it was coincidences in "My Cousin Vinny," so clearly it can happen, and maybe you are right here. But when it comes to corporate and banking power, in my experience, your first instinct should be to believe in coincidences.
- Tom
The system's filled with corrupt, power-seeking individuals, and pretty much everybody with any power is doing something sleazy and self-serving with it (because those are generally the types who seek out power to begin with). All the old safeguards against any one individual or small clique thereof getting too much power are pretty much gone; of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights, the only one still intact is the third, and that only because the government so far hasn't wanted to quarter anybody in our homes.
All the old safeguards against any one individual or small clique thereof getting too much power are pretty much gone; of the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights, the only one still intact is the third, and that only because the government so far hasn't wanted to quarter anybody in our homes.
Well that statement is just flat out true. Well done.
The 4th Amendment was just officially flushed down the toilet, though it had unofficially already been torn up.
I guess I'd say the 2nd Amendment still has some life as well. Funny it was not too long ago that I thought this amendment (insofar as a civilian militia represents a defense and deterrent to tyranny) was antiquated and no longer relevant.
Now I take some comfort in all those rural, NASCAR types with their guns. I had to smile when a few of them were interviewed in western Penn. about their support for Obama despite his political faux pas about people clinging to religion and guns and his flexible views of the Second Amendment and gun control.
Their response was they wouldn't be voting on that issue and weren't worried about gun control --- "Nobody is taking our guns. Let 'em try."
Now I am thinking that this is not such a bad thing.
Especially until Cheney is officially gone. And I won't assume that he will be gone - until he is gone. You see there are these classified "continuity of government" plans that, at least, Congress is suppose to be able to look at, but was turned down.
And former General Tommy Franks happen to let it slip out that we are one WMD terrorist attack on our soil away from Marshall Law.
But that could never happen here - right?
Though I cannot remember who got all the contracts to build all the detention centers - that are built and ready to go just in case - but it may have been Haliburton. I could look it up.
Caveman - is this what you are referring to with all these "black helicopter" references? I don't think the founding fathers knew anything about that, but I think they did have a certain healthy mistrust for unchecked, concentrated power. Maybe you are more trusting of the current government and its shredding of Constitutional protections, but I would not be so quick to believe that this is benign and for our own good as they are telling us.
- Tom
Hey it was coincidences in "My Cousin Vinny," so clearly it can happen
Of course, if it happens in a movie it can happen in real life... Yeah, that's a good way to determine if your paranoid fantasies are real or not.
Most of the time all you need to explain crooked political actions are crooked politicians. You don't need some multi generational mega conspiracy of the Treasury Dept or some other cabal of dark sinister oligarchs to make sense of it all.
Bad men want to do bad things. Bad men see certain things as hindrances to that goal so they do what they can to overcome the obstacles. It's no different when the burglar tosses poisoned meat to a dog or when a politician tries to get a troublesome law or regulation altered for their benefit. No evil Skull and Bones conspiracy there, just bad men doing bad things so they can reap ill gotten rewards.
Bad men want to do bad things. Bad men see certain things as hindrances to that goal so they do what they can to overcome the obstacles
Right. And that includes getting laws changed to make it easier to do the bad things.
I don't get this preoccupation of yours with this notion of "conspiracy" as being some defining and dividing line between some sort of "normal" criminal/bad guy behavior that is contrasted with some kind of "fantasy" criminal behavior.
Except when a criminal acts alone - by himself - which rarely constitutes a major threat to society, you have criminals or bad guys acting in concert, which if you want to label a conspiracy - you are right - it is.
Watergate was a conspiracy.
Organized crime is a conspiracy.
The huge mortgage fraud sending our economy downward is a conspiracy.
Skooter Libby went to jail for lying about conspiratorial action.
The misrepresenting of the WMD threat to goad the country into war was a conspiracy.
What does your labeling something as a "conspiracy" add to the discussion?
Any conduct that poses a real threat to us by people with power is going to be a conspiracy - because no one with any power acts alone.
What's your point? Other than you seem to have latched onto a Fox News talking point in reaction to people questioning the motives of those in power.
- Tom
There are conspiracies and then there are Conspiracies (tm). A conspiracy is when some bad men work together to do bad things, or when good men work together to do good things for sneaky reasons, like Christmas shopping.
A Conspiracy (tm) is a fantastic idea that there are secretive tie ins between all manner of normal conspiracies. Your idea that Secret Service agents are involved with a multi generational Conspiracy to protect the Federal Reserve system from Presidents who would undo their evil schemes is just such a Conspiracy (tm).
Tying in all of the horrible financial events of the last few years into one uber secretive effort by the banking industry to undermine some part of the American Dream (tm) is another Conspiracy (tm).
Just because bad people conspire to do do bad things doesn't mean there are such multi generational and multi national conspiracies to deprive you of your life, liberty or porno-mag collection. It is likely that all of your failings in life are your own fault and not the fault of the Bilderbergs, the Rockefellers or even the UFOs.
"You don't need some multi generational mega conspiracy ... or some other cabal of dark sinister oligarchs to make sense of it all."
OK. I'll agree that in analyzing a particular set of facts, you should not prematurely jump to a particular type of conclusion before it is properly justified by the facts.
And I don't think that I mentioned a "multi generational mega conspiracy or some other cabal of dark sinister oligarchs to make sense of it all."
But since you brought this up, let's take a look at it. I think that it is fair to say that this description of yours aptly fits what is commonly known as the "Mafia."
The Mafia crime families represented a "multi generational mega conspiracy [and] cabal of dark sinister oligarchs."
Furthermore, during the reign of J. Edgar Hoover, it was the policy of the FBI to publicly deny the existence of the Mafia. Now some believe this was a quid pro quo for the mafia's help during WWII at the docks and shipyards to counter nazi saboteurs. Others believe it was likely a product of the mafia having pics of ol' J Edgar dawning garter belts and bras.
The moral of the story here - Caveman - is that whether or not any particular "conspiracy" exists or not should be evaluated on the facts.
It seems very clear that your use of Conspiracy (TM) is merely an ad hominem argument, which as you know is just a substitute for a real argument, usually for want of a real argument.
As you demonstrate:
"Just because bad people conspire to do do bad things doesn't mean there are ... conspiracies to deprive you of your life, liberty or porno-mag collection. It is likely that all of your failings in life are your own fault and not the fault of ... the UFOs.
Classic Bill O'Reilly ad hominen. Very weak dude. Not to mention your straw man technique.
You raise the issue of my failings? Because of big-time financial fraud?
Here is a conversation that took place today in a conspiratorial location (Men's Room). Top-flight criminal defense attorney asks me how is business.
Me: "Good." (I made seven figures in past 12 months.)
Him: "Really?"
Me: "Yes, Bill, there are no shortage of financial fraud cases right now."
Him: "Oh, yea, yea, yea - right." (Having momentarily not connected my specialty to current events.)
I did playfully point out some irony and coincidences relating to the history of the Secret Service and presidents who tried to steer away from Central banking (Which is something that I don't think you really understand - few do - I did not a couple of years ago). And I immediately noted that it was coincidental and speculative, but as far as how the financial markets operate --- Really dude, we can argue any specifics you want to argue, but .... I don't think you really want to go there.
- Tom
having pics of ol' J Edgar dawning garter belts and bras.
If business really is so great for you lately, perhaps now you can aford that remedial spelling course. I think the word you wanted was donning. I don't think anyone "dawns" garter belts and bras - not even women.
Thanks spelling nazi.
Multi-tasking with my ADD often results in my typing phonetically. I often switch out are & our - an & and - your & you're
Dawning for donning is a good one. : )
I also do not proof-read much for blogs (I do too much proofing in my work), and proofing is the real issue.
I left out a "not" in a concluding paragraph a few posts back, which reverses my entire point and you're picking on a phonetically misspelled word?
Well thanks for your contribution. : )
- Tom
If business really is so great for you lately, perhaps now you can aford that remedial spelling course
"F" is for "Fuhrer," Mein Spelling Nazi, and there's two of them in "afford."
Tom, if you want to point at the Mafia as proof that the Secret Service is ready and waiting to off a particularly troublesome president then let me prove the existence of Bigfoot in an equally spurious method.
There are large primates. There are primates that walk on two legs. There must be Bigfoots because there are other large primates that walk on two legs that we know about.
The Mafia is a criminal conspiracy that does span generations. However, aside from one delusional FBI director, no one else, especially the Mafia itself, has ever tried to deny it's existence.
The reason for that is such large scale Conspiracies (tm) that you are fond of require everyone to keep their mouths shut. If there is one thing the Bush admin has shown us, no one in government likes to keep their mouth shut.
How could the Secret Service be charged with taking down rogue Presidents for over 100 years and this detail never came to light?
As for your delusions of adequacy, I could claim to be the porn star Ron Jeremy, but that doesn't mean I'm hung like a horse. Just because you claim to be a six figure salary legal eagle type doesn't make it true. You could be an unemployed truck driver named Lou whose wife just left him because the house got foreclosed on.
In fact the later is more likely because most Conspiracy Theorists are one paycheck away from living under a bridge. That's why they see these dark Conspiracies behind everything that has ever done them harm. It's not that they used their home like an ATM while the market was going nuts. They lost their homes because the Global Banking and Finance Cartel plotted to take their home from them.
I also do not proof-read much for blogs
Oh. I thought that was your proof-read version. :-) You may not think spelling and proper word usage are "the real issue," but theories and arguments that are advanced by someone who writes like an ignoramus usually aren't taken very seriously by educated people. You may plead ADD or carelessness or time issues, but how is anyone to know that your thinking and "investigating" are not just as sloppy as your presentation? Spelling mistakes and obvious typos are one thing (several things actually,) but how is one to discern whether you are using a word incorrectly or just spelling "phonetically?" Usually only children, foreigners, and bubbas write that way; properly tutored people write and spell correctly by habit, even when they are in a hurry.
That was a good deal more than I had planned as my "contribution," so now I'll just let you resume your wild, unsubstantiated musings.
Mein Spelling Nazi, and there's two of them in "afford."
Yes, M'love, I know - and I had actually even looked it up before using it - but that is a "true" typo. ;-) Peace?
"F" is for "Fuhrer,"
Ain't not neither - I nose wat F is fer. Ini buddi dew. Hit stans fer F***up. huh?
In fact the later is more likely because most Conspiracy Theorists are one paycheck away from living under a bridge.
Latter has two "t"s.
That's the first time I've heard the theory that J. Edgar's policy on the Mafia was due to his being "delusional." I think that has a much lower order of probability than the two I mentioned, but I'll add it to the list.
Caveman, your logic is so poor that it is painful.
No wonder you resort to ad hominem and straw man arguments so frequently.
I never argued that the Secret Service is tasked with taking down Presidents. I only pointed out the irony and coincidental features of its origins. (And they have not been protecting the Presidents for 100 years - they got that part of their job much later.) And if you doubt that a head of the US Central Bank would fight a US President with all his power, should that President threaten the Bank, then you should read about Biddle and Andrew Jackson. Biddle was the head of the US Central Bank when Jackson refused to renew its charter. You can read what Biddle himself wrote - his correspondence was preserved. Know your facts.
And your proof that governments do not engage in conspiracies is that so many who have left the Bush
Admin. have blown the whistle on Admin. conspiracies? OK And isn't that proof of the conspiracy?
And you say the government can never successfully keep a conspiracy hidden? And you can prove this how? The only ones that you would know about are the ones that were unsuccessfully hidden. How could you possibly know about the successfully hidden ones?
But Caveman, we can have a middle ground test here. The LBJ Administration made up and lied about US Ships getting attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin, in order to get us into one of the worse wars in US history. It was also successfully kept secret for over 40 years, until about 2005. Now according to you - that's impossible.
But apparently it is not impossible. So what lessons have we learned here - Caveman?
Calling something a Conspiracy (TM) as an ad hominem form of argument should be beneath you. Treat each case on its own merits. Just because some fringe whackos may be obsessed with the Federal Reserve in a way that makes no sense does not mean that Central Banking is not a problem. If you ever studied the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and their connection to Third World poverty, maybe you'd understand better.
Jennifer is righteously upset about the assault on the 4th Amendment, but that does not mean she thinks the FBI has a live person listening to her calls right now. You throw everything into the same large pot and call it names.
Come on bro - you can do better than that.
As far as my financial success goes ... well you raised the issue first. But hey - with $9,000 per month to my ex -- I am not buying any yachts. : )
I probably have enough to hire the spelling Nazi to proof my blogs though.
Keep it real - Caveman.
- Tom
You may not think spelling and proper word usage are "the real issue," but theories and arguments that are advanced by someone who writes like an ignoramus usually aren't taken very seriously by educated people.
I guess it's lucky for me that you do not sit on any Appellate Courts, because apparently I would have lost all those cases otherwise.
And I always thought educated people judged arguments on their merits - but you do it on style?
Lucky for Immanuel Kant the history of philosophy is not determined by your criteria.
- Tom
I probably have enough to hire the spelling Nazi to proof my blogs though.
I wouldn't bet on that; maybe Bubba could help you. ;-)
And I always thought educated people judged arguments on their merits - but you do it on style?
Lucky for Immanuel Kant the history of philosophy is not determined by your criteria.
Manny fails on both counts. ;-)
maybe Bubba could help you
a loryur? (sniff sniff) wy ah dun wiped better smellin stuff 'n dat offn me boots.
sumtimes offn me arss, too! (I dasnt lak ta war no drors, ya see.)
Manny fails on both counts. ;-)
Ok - that was funny.
You probably could condense the worthwhile points to be drawn from the Critique of Pure Reason into ten readable pages.
But it was still a breakthrough for the time. : )
And he still was a helluva intellect.
- Tom
Ah, I love the sight of back-peddling in the morning, it looks like victory.
So now you aren't trying to tell us of great banking and Secret Service conspiracies. You were just pointing out neat coincidences. I see how it is.
So you are now claiming this statement, "And should a President ever pose a threat to the currency, well .... who is there to step aside, look the other way etc., at just the right moment?", doesn't mean what it says.
I wonder what else you have written that doesn't mean what you think you mean it to say.
Maybe all of it?
Is your name even Tom?
"And should a President ever pose a threat to the currency, well .... who is there to step aside, look the other way etc., at just the right moment?", doesn't mean what it says.
Yes- Caveman, it means that I posed a question, just as it reads. In addition to which, I also pointed out the historical irony and a lot of coincidences.
And when you responded to the question, I conceded that you were probably right:
"Oh - you're probably right Caveman, if you like to believe in coincidences. But setting [aside] the the coincidental and speculative nature [of my question and the history of Secret Service]..."
And I thereafter stuck with the facts, given your ill-tempered reaction to the subject.
Is your name even Tom?
Ok, I confess. You got me there. My real name is Thomas.
Now if you really are a lawyer, here is a little assignment for you that should satisfy your doubts and curiosity.
First Clue: 244 Conn. 732
The attorney representing the elderly philanthropist and Jewish charities against the brokerage firm in the stock options fraud case is named Thomas.
You should also be able to find the press release as to what happened after the Appeal was won and the case went to arbitration, showing we got $2,000,000. The press release was put out by the brokerage firm, claiming victory, which it was for them. (We got screwed by the arbitrator.) This was years ago and just one example, but with that info you could find more examples if you are still curious.
And you should be able to track down and contact the attorney who handled all of this. Call up and ask for Tom and say it is "Caveman Lawyer," and I'll take the call. I'm sure that you can quiz me sufficiently to be certain that it is me.
Fair enough? : )
- Thomas
Yeah, sure. You know I'm no more a lawyer than you are. You are probably a 57 year old unemployed dock worker named Lou whose wife left him after you lost your job. You know I can no more research that stuff than the Caveman Lawyer character on SNL could.
And don't try to claim you weren't pushing your wacky Conspiracy Theory on us. You may have said "Oh - you're probably right Caveman," but you added the bit "if you like to believe in coincidences". You further on dismissed coincidence as an explanation for the dark nature of the vast Secret Service - Banking Cabal conspiracy you were going on about.
Try and talk yourself out of your Black Helicopter chair if you want but your seat belt is securely fastened and there is no ejection seat for you, Lou.
You know Caveman, I am beginning to think you are projecting.
Jennifer, you are a former reporter. We live in the same County. You can track me down. Then you can tell Caveman who I really am. If the legal case cite is not enough info ... I can make it easier.
BTW Caveman - still under 50 (and as former star athlete - still got it) and live in corner apartment of 27th floor of Hartford21 - not under the highway.
: )
Here's a conspiracy theory for you Caveman. It has to do with your obsession with Conspiracy Theories (TM) and Black Helicopters. Jennifer wrote a piece on 9/11. Is that when you showed up to monitor her blog site?
If that's not your purpose, I am always open to the facts. I said who I am and what I do - who the hell are you?
Some pimply faced 15 year old with no friends and not enough exercise and sun?
- Tom
Yeah Tommy, I'm sure you are this Thomas P. Willcutts of the Willcutts Law Group. More likely you are screwing the receptionist and he will happily pretend to be the boss to put shock and awe into some guy you are messing with on the Internet.
You spend far too much time on the Internet to be some high powered six figure lawyer who heads up a law firm dealing with big dollar clients.
A man with a B.A. from Rice University and who was an Associate Editor of Washington University Law Quarterly can't be so bad with grammar and spelling, the ADD is a lame excuse. You don't see me trying to claim my sleep apnea is responsible for using later instead of latter.
As for who I am, I'm Ron Jeremy, famous porn star. The man with the the largest third leg in the history of the porn industry. You've probably stayed up late with a box of Kleenexes watching my classics.
I'm Ron Jeremy, famous porn star. The man with the the largest third leg in the history of the porn industry.
BULLSHIT! I had you beat by a good five inches, you little shrimp!
Yeah sure buddy, five inches in girl math. Not in real math.
Actually, I have proofread materials for a bar journal and a state legislature, and it is truly depressing how poorly many attorneys and judges write, really much worse than anyone in this forum...
Just to burst Mr. Troll's bubble for the sake of posterity, the Secret Service was charged with protecting the President because, at the time, there were no other Federal law enforcement agencies under the control of the Executive Branch. So, since it was either the Federal Marshals (who work for the courts, creating nasty issues of separation of powers) or the Secret Service, it was pretty much a no-brainer. I have no doubt that if you read this you'll just dismiss it, but I felt that Google crawler, at least, should know the truth.
Just ran across this blog, and am curious if Caveman Lawyer took Tom's challenge to call. Doubtful, too scared I'm sure. The conversation could become a debate, and trust me, Caveman, you will lose. Tom is a genius, and ADD he does not have.
And for Tom, let's play a guessing game of who Caveman might be? Not a lawyer...Maybe banks and mortgages? Probably initials VC because he/she doesn't seem that bright.
Hey Caveman Lawwhore, Lay off of Thomas Patrick or i'm liable to lay some really bad, malevolent black sorcery your way, Nipissing Indian style, just for kicks understand; then you can redefine the word conspiracy for the 11th anniversary of the latest Day of Infamy.
john the excommunicated baptist, ex-catholic heretic Agnostic
John, why are you posting on a four-year-old thread? "Caveman" hasn't commented here in years. I wouldn't even have seen this, did I not get email alerts for new comments.
Sorry, Jennifer, i had no idea. i was doing family ancestry research again and trying to check out if Thomas Willcutts of North Carolina @ late 1700s to 1800s had any connection to the Cherokee Indians. That search had me stumble upon this blog where it appeared to me that a Caveman was beating up on my brother, who actually turned out to be a good lawyer, and i am proud of him for that, and can even be protective of him, just as he was protective of me at times as my older brother, such as my first year at Rice, a family tradition that i broke when i left; Lovett or Leave It, but its Natalie Maines and the Dixie Chicks baby, "Lubbock or Leave It". im the one who discovered the Native "Canadian" roots thru a Y-DNA test i did for the Walcott/Wolcott Family Ancestry research group, who were trying to track down the "missing link" in their familiy lines to John Walcott who was captured/kidnapped, or uh, rescued by Natives who took him back to Canada, where he eventually fathered child(ren) in a tribe, from whom Tom and i are direct descendants, just like our grandfather, Vice Admiral Morton Douglas Willcutts Sr., who should have been Surgeon General of the US, but Truman had a croney in mind, and broke Navy tradition to give it to him against the wishes or demands of 3 Admirals and the Marine Commandant. The Navy broke tradition in response and made grandad a Vice Adm. as a member of the medical corps, a rank reserved for Surgeon Generals. The Cherokee Attorney General seemed to recognize me at the federal bldg parking lot, red skin, long black hair and all, and said to me, "Wheres your Feather." He was defensive of me, as well, and things i was enduring at the time (2008). Maybe the Cherokee People and Tribe should have grandads military service recognized as one who may be/is part Cherokee. i have not pinned this down yet, and there is a genetic test that they have, he told me about, which i have not taken yet, since it does cost a bit and i would need to return to Cherokee, NC and track it down. Fact is, the ole Thomas Willcutts showed up in NC with a new last name, probably an Indian vesrion. The Indian Tribes that the white men (i.e. Walcott/Wolcott) mentioned concerning John Walcott IV, are the Algonquin (i.e. not the common language, but the tribe) and the Abenaki. After reading Chief Kirby Whiteduck"s, "Algonquin Traditional Culture", i am the one naming the Nipissing, because i am maybe most like them. i am the black sheep indian of the bunch, Thomas Patrick is more the civilized and respectable attorney. i am kind of proud of a couple of the things he said, not to mention some of his legal cases that i stumbled upon in researching his ancestor, Thomas Willcutts, maybe more than one of them, well yes there is, but maybe just one john since the rescue centuries ago, or two at the most. i am sorry that i bothered you with my defense of him. i can assure you that this is the real McCoy modern Thomas Patrick Willcutts who was blogging here, and he is smart, maybe not quite a genius, but very bright and doing some good with his abilities in an often ugly profession. Only John Francis or one of his other siblings (i.e. Kathleen Marie, Micheal David, Brian Joseph, Sharon Ann (Lolly), Kevin Paul [Dodo, who wouldnt] and Maureen Dianne) could do something like verify that. i can get defensive of some siblings between our differences, when someone is being abusive, as Caveman was. i guess you know Tom"s Law Firm is in Hartford, and that was actually him on your blog, and i am his "little" brother, crazy as ever... i wont bother back, so the only way to ask anything else is at John.Willcutts@gmail.com
Caveman was beating up on my brother, who actually turned out to be a good lawyer, ... i guess you know Tom"s Law Firm is in Hartford, and that was actually him on your blog,
He might be a good lawyer, but he was a really creepy, quasi-obsessive commenter on my blog here for awhile, and if I were looking for a Connecticut-based lawyer, his behavior here alone would've been enough to make me take my business elsewhere. Caveman did a public service in outing his identity, so far as I'm concerned; I've had quite a few people over the years visit this blog after searching for your brother's name, and I doubt they were much impressed by what they found.
For future reference: if you want people to read long enormous chunks of words you write, use the enter key to break it up into paragraphs.
Post a Comment
<< Home