Mary Margaret Oliver – HB for Gun Confiscation/assault weapons ban in Georgia


Gun confiscation bill introduced in Georgia
Gun confiscation bill introduced in Georgia
Parsons Patrick November 29, 2016
https://www.georgiagunowners.org/2016/11/29/gun-confiscation-bill-introduced-in-georgia/

Anti-gun witch Mary Margaret Oliver knew you wouldn’t be paying attention during the Thanksgiving holiday.

That’s why she pre-filed her so-called “Assault Weapons Ban” bill (H.B. 10) the day before Thanksgiving!

Hoping she could do so without a ruckus, she forgot that Georgia Gun Owners publicly exposed her and her anti-gun cronies at the Capitol within minutes of the bill’s introduction this past January.

That’s why I’m at the Capitol — right now — to let you know what’s happening with H.B. 10, that would ban dozens of firearms in Georgia, as well as .50 caliber ammunition.

Please click here to join me for a LIVE broadcast on our Facebook page (you have to be signed into Facebook; scroll to the LIVE video when you get on our page) from just outside Oliver’s meeting of anti-gunners today at the Capitol.

ggopress

For freedom,

Patrick Parsons
Executive Director
Georgia Gun Owners

Posted in 2nd Amendment in the News, Latest News
Tagged “assault weapons” ban, Constitutional Carry, Gun control, H.B. 10, Mary Margaret Oliver, Oliver Gun Ban, shared-news

Check out this witch of a gun confiscation/gun control freak:
http://marymargaretoliver.org/


That is just the tip of the iceberg for this woman.

Many people don’t know about the tragedies within the Probate Courts of this country, and guardianships. Mary Margaret Oliver is one of the DeKalb County, Georgia Probate Court appointed guardians for children and elderly. These “guardians” rob the elderly. I don’t know if she has been involved with robbing from children’s accounts, but I do know she has been appointed by Probate Court numerous times, and have talked with the people who have had to try to stop this woman (if you will) from stealing all of the accounts blind, and that was when she was appointed by the court as an administrator over a Will that named an executor of the estate. Since there was money within the estate, the Probate court decided that the county needed to appoint the administrator.

People yall be careful out there, and keep your families away from Probate Courts if you can. Also keep guardianships away from your elderly beloved family members. Our aunt was taken from all family, hidden from family and died a horrible death while being brainwashed to think family had not looked for her. The guardian of property took our names off of our accounts, delinked all of our Wachovia brokerage/savings/checking accounts, and began spending our money. In the end, there was nothing left out of the $600,000 taken from us.
Since the DeKalb County Georgia Probate Judge (Debra Rosh, clerk at the time) was involved, as was a DeKalb County Superior Court Judge (Hunter) and Wachovia of course, no one would sue them, not one single attorney would go up against these crooks.
That was when we were forced to learn about pro se litigation. Another long story.

That’s right, Mary Margaret Oliver.
Her HB is here: http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/MemberLegislation.aspx?Member=181&Session=23

They take the name “assault weapon” to a whole new level…

Advertisements

ENENews: “Fukushima fallout…Nearly triple the highest level reported anywhere on West Coast”

With TEPCO having finally given up fighting the onslaught of radiation pouring into the Pacific Ocean, and considering the breeder reactors were creating weapons grade plutonium, it ain’t over, and may never be over.  Our govt. don’t care enough to be honest with us.  Down the road, several years from now, when all of us, lying there dying from cancer, think back on it, we will put two and two together.  Some of us will anyway, and will know that the horrible death we are being put through, was the Japanese’s way of payback for nuking them!

Fukushima fallout on vegetation in South Florida exceeded gov’t notification limit by over 1,000% — Nearly triple the highest level reported anywhere on West Coast

Published: November 27th, 2014 at 8:39 am ET
By ENENews
http://enenews.com/radioactive-vegetation-south-florida-1000-above-nrc-reporting-level-due-fukushima-fallout

Florida Power & Light Company, St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 & 2 (St. Lucie, FL) — 2011 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, submitted to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

BROADLEAF VEGETATION: Brazilian Pepper from location H59 — 10-20 miles S/SSE of reactors on south end of Hutchinson Island, [30 miles north of Palm Beach]

Iodine-131 on 22-Mar: 1,220 pCi/kg (wet weight)
Iodine-131 on 29-Mar: 605 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 on 06-Apr: 242 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 on 13-Apr: 136 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 on 20-Apr: 79 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 on 26-Apr: 45 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 on 03-May: 21 pCi/kg
Iodine-131 is “attributed to the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants event. Elevated levels of radioiodine were measured through-out the U.S.”
NRC Reporting Level for Vegetation = 100 pCi/kg (wet weight)
H 59 J

NRC Reporting Level: “The concentration value in an environmental sample, if exceeded, which must be reported to the NRC.”
Veg CA

The highest I-131 level reported in vegetation from the West Coast is 462 pCi/kg in Central California. The March 22 South Florida sample is nearly triple that amount.

See also: Emergency radiation testing used at Democrat and Republican conventions after Fukushima; Also for Obama Inauguration — Seafood, meat, vegetables, milk, water checked for nuclear waste, while top officials agree to publicly downplay crisis — 80% of milk samples by Orlando, FL had ‘significant’ Cs-137

Published: November 27th, 2014 at 8:39 am ET
By ENENews
Email Article Email Article
89 comments
Like ENENews on Facebook
Follow ENENews on Twitter
Subscribe to the ENENews RSS Feed
Sign up for daily email updates
Related Posts
Newly released data shows Florida hit with highest level of radioactive material from Fukushima measured anywhere in world outside Japan — #1 out of more than 1,500 test results — Total radioactive iodine was up to 500% of amount reported September 26, 2014
Fukushima nuclear material reported in West Coast groundwater; It’s discharging into Pacific Ocean — Fallout also found in meat and fish from same area — “Routinely detected’ in plant life long after March 2011 September 4, 2014
Twice as much Fukushima radiation near California coast than originally reported; Highest levels found anywhere in Eastern Pacific — Scientist: Very little we can do… It’s unprecedented… God forbid anything else happens — Gundersen: Multiple plumes now along west coast… Will be coming “for century or more” (AUDIO) November 20, 2014
Officials by West Coast Speak Out on Fukushima: Concerns about cancer, illness from contaminated food — ‘Low-level’ radiation being reported in fish — “We cannot sit by and watch and wait” — National gov’t appears to not be taking it seriously January 20, 2014
Levels of Iodine-131 spike to highest levels yet in Philadelphia water supply — Almost double permissible limit December 7, 2012

OCCUPY.COM Expose Courts Blocking the Public From Sitting In On Trials In Georgia Courts, What Better Way to Show How Corrupt The Courts Are?

OCCUPY.COM EXPOSES GEORGIA’S COURTS DENYING THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS!

I am quite pleased that someone took notice. The Judges in Georgia are akin to little despots. No doubt, a Judge is God in their Courtroom, but they don’t have the right to Deny the public access, so that they can violate one’s Civil and Constitutional Rights while they sneakily do it.

accused flanked by attorneys at sentencing court

EXPOSED: GEORGIA’S COURTS ARE BREAKING THE LAW BY DENYING PUBLIC ACCESS
TUE, 9/24/2013 – BY TANYA GLOVER

Courtrooms aren’t just a place where justice is served and legal decisions are made. They are also a place for the public to go and see how the justice system works: people enjoy viewing trials and hearings, even if they have no personal stake in them. Viewing public trials is the public’s legal right.

However, revelations by a judicial oversight commission in Georgia show that numerous judges in the state, including some in Atlanta, are violating the law by denying public access to courtrooms in cases ranging from bail hearings to standard trials.

There are some cases in which closing courtrooms to the public is legal, and the circumstances for this are carefully outlined in official Georgia State documents that make the points for legality clear. But according to a recent report in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, investigations by the state’s judicial oversight commission found the practice of sealing off courtroom access widespread across Georgia — and in most cases, illegally.

Instead of typical open courts, there are now signs posted on courtroom doors stating access is denied to either the general public or specific groups of people, including kids. Bailiffs sometimes stand in place of the signs, blocking entry to the court despite people’s legal right to go in, said Robert Ingram, an attorney from Marietta, Ga., and chairman of the state’s Judicial Qualifications Commission.

“We’ve had our own investigators and commissioners go out and visit a courtroom and they have been greeted by a bailiff or a deputy sheriff and been told to state their business or otherwise they don’t need to be there,” Ingram said.

But why the closed rooms and bans on view judicial proceedings in the first place? Under Georgia’s law, closing off or banning someone from the courtroom can be done at a judge’s discretion. For instance, an unruly or disruptive person, whether child or adult, can be removed. Or there may be a case not considered proper for people under the age of 18 to attend.

More often, however, judges these days claim they are keeping out the public because of lack of space in the courtroom. One instance that put this closed court behavior in the spotlight was the jury selection for Andrea Sneiderman, in which DeKalb Superior Court Judge Gregory Adams lifted the public ban stating that people who wished to be present for the selection had the right to do so.

Seemingly arbitrary court closures by judges in the Peach State are nothing new. Back in 2011, Barbra Mobley, a DeKalb County State Court Judge, resigned after investigations were launched by the Judicial Qualifications Commission alleging that her court featured bailiffs questioning people illegally about why they wanted to observe the cases on the docket.

The phenomenon is occurring statewide. In both Crisp and Ben Hill counties, the Southern Center for Human Rights (SCHR) filed suit against the practice of closing courts to the public. In those counties, it’s been common that courts remain closed off even to the family members of both victims and the accused, other than their attendance at guilt pleas during the trials’ conclusions.

Further investigations have showed that closed courts are more common than first thought. According Gerry Weber of SCHR, this is causing a major problem with transparency. “A closed courtroom is one that is less accountable to the public. What is done behind closed doors can be different to what is done in the cold light of day,” he said.

Many judges are following the closed court lead, including Judge T. Jackson Bedford of the Fulton County Superior Court, Judge Clarence Seeliger of the DeKalb County Superior Court, and Judge Patsy Porter of Fulton State Court. Attempts by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution to contact these servants of the people were unsuccessful, as were the attempts made by Occupy.com.

There are some positive signs as well, however. Judge Christopher Brasher of Fulton Superior Court says he was unaware that the practice of closing courts was occurring in his courtroom, and quickly put a stop to it. Brasher attributed the action to “overzealous deputies, who provide security and order.” He has since ordered that no one be keep out of the court, and that no signs excluding any specific group be put up without his written consent.

Judges Todd Markle and Robert McBurney, both of Fulton Superior Court, say they were not aware the public was being deterred with signs from entering their courts, and that this step was taken without their permission. However, there is debate about the judges’ knowledge of the situation. Each county sheriff’s department is responsible for court security, and Fulton County Sheriff’s Department spokesperson Tracy Flanagan says they do not make or affix signs nor are signs permitted without the consent of the presiding judge.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission issued an opinion on the matter, from the commission’s director Jeff Davis who said massive amounts of complaints have come from the public about access to courtrooms. “Our efforts to educate judges about these issues have resulted in the type of response we would have anticipated,” said Davis.

“Judges are complying with the opinion and modifying practices accordingly. Since the issuance of our Opinion, we have been encouraged by the response of judges and the willingness to bring their courts into full compliance with the law.”

Now The News Is Told That They Are Not to Continue Reporting on Ebola, WHY?

From a Trusted News Source..

Earlier today we were contacted by a customer asking if we had received a tap on the shoulder by the CDC telling us to stop reporting on developments concerning Ebola. This individual’s motivation was the sudden drop off in message traffic from our service over the past 10 days.

220px Ebola virus virion

For the record, NO, we have not received such a request, nor would we comply.

But the inquiry raises important questions:

Why has the overall tempo of Ebola stories slowed to a trickle?

Why has the overall tempo of suspected case reports from hospitals and health departments dropped off?

You may recall that on 10/21 AlertsUSA sent the following SMS message to subscriber mobile devices:

“FLASH: CDC insider tells AlertsUSA that U.S. hospitals being advised to NOT publicly report suspected / confirmed Ebola cases using privacy laws as shield.”

This evening we were informed that Obama Administration efforts to squash reporting on suspected or confirmed cases of Ebola in the U.S. goes much further. Then consider the following single sentence from a Forbes news story published late on 11/2:

“The Associated Press and other press outlets have agreed not to report on suspected cases of Ebola in the United States until a positive viral RNA test is completed.”

http://onforb.es/1EevzcF

And there you have it.

1. Control the source of the news (hospitals and health departments).

2. Control the propagation of the news (mainstream news outlets and wire services).

It would seem that our new Ebola Czar has been hard at work behind the curtain.

The takeaway here is concerning on multiple levels and should serve to highlight, yet again, that mainstream reporting and information sharing by public agencies is not quite as free and independent as the public may think.

Despite this blackout of sorts,receives a steady stream of information from other sources nationally and globally. Before anything is reported to you, we always seek secondary and tertiary confirmation so as to maintain accuracy. This directly translates into trust in the service.

We deal in black and white facts. No grey matter. No rumors.

That said, healthcare workers, public health professionals and members of the armed services have privately have informed us of the details of numerous additional CONFIRMED cases of Ebola quietly being treated at medical facilities in multiple locations across the U.S.. Many of these have been transported to CONUS from abroad. But without solid confirmation upon which we can stake the reputation of the company, the blowback could be significant.

Excerpts from Tragedy and Hope Selected by henrymakow.com

Insider Confirmed Conspiracy is No “Theory”

Thursday, October 16, 2014 9:49
Get FREE private and secure Email and Messaging click now!

(Before It’s News)

1625cfrquigley.jpg
Caroll Quigley (1910-1977) taught at Princeton, Harvard and Georgetown Universities. In his book,Tragedy and Hope, (1966) he confirmed that private merchant bankers create money out of nothing and control world affairs to their advantage.

 

“There does exist, and has existed for a
generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some
extent, in the way the … Right believes the Communists act. In fact,
this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no
aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and
frequently does so. I know of the operations of this
network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for
two years, in the early 1960′s, to examine its papers and secret
records.” Tragedy and Hope p. 960

Excerpts from Tragedy and Hope
Selected by henrymakow.com

Pg. 48-49:

In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way, not by note-issuing banks but by deposit banks. Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against deposits by depositors and given to third persons were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by bookkeeping transactions on the accounts.

Accordingly, it was necessary for the banker to keep on hand in actual money (gold, certificates, and notes) no more than the fraction of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed; the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it rather than withdraw it in money, such “created deposits” or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a fraction of their value. Such created deposits also were a creation of money out of nothing, although bankers usually refused to express their actions, either note issuing or deposit lending, in these terms. William Paterson, however, on obtaining the charter of the Bank of England in 1694, to use the moneys he had won in privateering, said, “The Bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” This was repeated by Sir Edward Holden, founder of the Midland Bank, on December 18, 1907, and is, of course, generally admitted today.

Pg. 51: The merchant bankers of London had already at hand in 1810-1850 the Stock Exchange, the Bank of England, and the London money market when the needs of advancing industrialism called all of these into the industrial world which they had hitherto ignored. In time they brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers, organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other.

The men who did this, looking backward toward the period of dynastic monarchy in which they had their own roots, aspired to establish dynasties of international bankers and were at least as successful at this as were many of the dynastic political rulers. The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild’s five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, as well as Frankfort, cooperated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled.

Pg. 52: The names of some of these banking families are familiar to all of us and should be more so. They include Raring, Lazard, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Seligman, the Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould, and above all Rothschild and Morgan. …

Pg. 324: The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.

The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montagu Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.

Pg. 326-327: It must not be felt that these heads of the world’s chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called “international” or “merchant” bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks.

Source: http://henrymakow.com/2014/10/Insider-Confirmed-Conspiracy-is-No-Theory.html

EBOLA CREATED IN AMERICAN LABS

Profile image
19
1
Story Views

Now: 7
Last Hour: 38
Last 24 Hours: 479
Total: 479

EBOLA VIRUS UNWELCOME IN THE AMERICANS: CREATED IN AMERICAN LABS

Wednesday, October 1, 2014 13:29

https://i0.wp.com/i.huffpost.com/gen/1946713/thumbs/o-EBOLA-570.jpg

We said it here first (July 2014) that the Ebola Virus would strike the USA and Europe, reports of at least 18 potential cases in Dallas,TX after healthcare workers (Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas) forget to correctly diagnose man who traveled from Liberia and is now infected with Ebola Virus, and has been in contact with others including school children.

https://melbrake.wordpress.com/2014/08/17/3000-ebola-martyrs-warned-ready-to-strike-america/

It has been reported that the Ebola Virus was created by Americans Labs.

Ebola Virus and Devizes Crop Circle: One of These Man-Made

Posted on July 30, 2014 by melbrake

July 30, 2014 another impressive crop circle appeared in Devizes, Roundway Hill, Wiltshire UK. This circle reminds us of the Ebola Virus strains which seems to be spreading from its border in three West African countries: Liberia,Guinea and Sierra Leone.

The Ebola virus may have been contracted in the US, and Europe is also very concerned.

The crop circle has signatures of not being man-made but there have been reports that Ebola Virus could be.

AIDS and Ebola Viruses Were “Man-Made:”Expert Shocks National Radio Audience

San Francisco – AIDS and Ebola viruses did not originate from monkeys left alone in the wild – they were bio engineered in American laboratories. So says an internationally known public health authority with Harvard credentials, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, based on a review of more than 2,500 government documents and scientific reports, some gained through the Freedom of Information Act and never before revealed to the general public. “The Gary Null” show, originating in New York on WBAI radio, syndicated in 20 cities and heard by more than a million people, will air this information, and more, during a one hour interview with Dr. Horowitz beginning on Tuesday, April 23, from 12:00 to 1:00 PM e.s.t., and later in the week throughout the country. Listeners will learn that HIV-1, and its parent, HIV-2, have been traced to National Cancer Institute (NCI) and military funded cancer virus experiments which used infected African green monkeys to produce vaccines intended to prevent hepatitis, leukemia, and other cancers.

The documented evidence revealed in Dr. Horowitz’s new book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola – Nature, Accident or Genocide? (Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 1996), shows that NCI researchers, during the 1960’s, mixed viral genes from different animals to produce leukemia, sarcoma, general wasting, and death. This provided the “cancer models” used to study human cancer and begin human vaccine trials. The book, described as the first in-depth exploration into the origins of AIDS and Ebola, and its controversial conclusions, have offended many top AIDS researchers, and been hailed by numerous others who have long questioned the green monkey theory, or feared disease outbreaks from viral vaccine experiments.

Reconciling the origin of AIDS and Ebola, as Dr. Horowitz has now done, is important for several reasons: First, many feel that victims of AIDS should not be blamed for starting the epidemic. With this evidence, those living with HIV/AIDS may now be freed from the stigma, shame, and guilt associated with the infection – a boost to their natural immunity. Second, new therapies might be developed from a better understanding of HIV’s origin. third, the events precipitating such epidemics should never be allowed to happen again. It is ethically important to understand, and therefore prevent, future outbreaks. Finally, those directly implicated in HIV’s development and transmission are the same individuals and institutions capitalizing on the epidemic and humanity’s suffering. Though many might consider this preposterous, as one Emerging Viruses review recently cautioned, “withhold any out-of-hand dismissal until you read this book,” or tune into Dr. Null’s extraordinary program.

Copyright © 1996. The Light Party.

https://melbrake.wordpress.com

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2775608/CDC-confirms-Dallas-patient-isolation-testing-returning-region-plagued-Ebola-HAS-deadly-virus.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/02/us/after-ebola-case-in-dallas-health-officials-seek-those-who-had-contact-with-patient.html?_r=0

The Cops Are Murdering People and the Attorneys Are Stealing From Them, And the Judges Ignore Both!

Posted: 5:04 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 27, 2014

Partner in firm accused of stealing $30 million

By Mike Petchenik

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/former-employee-allegedly-stole-millions-real-esta/ng9yk/

NORTH FULTON COUNTY, Ga —

Nat Hardwick photo
Former real estate employee, Nat Hardwick, allegedly stole millions from firm

The former managing partner of a large Atlanta real estate firm faces a lawsuit that claims he stole millions of dollars from the firm.

The lawsuit, obtained from a source by Channel 2’s Mike Petchenik, was filed Monday at Fulton County Superior court, and alleges that Nat Hardwick, a partner in Morris, Hardwick and Schneider, had taken at least $30 million from firm accounts and from escrow accounts belonging to Landcastle Title.

The lawsuit alleged that Hardwick took “approximately a $1,000,000 to pay providers of private jet services,” and made “$4,000,000 in wire transfers to casinos.”

The lawsuit also alleges that Hardwick covered up his actions until they were discovered by auditors.

In a memo sent to customers Monday, also obtained by Petchenik through a source, firm officials confirmed that Hardwick had resigned his position.

“These activities have negatively affected the future of our company and our customers,” the memo said. “However, Fidelity National Title Group, one of our long-standing and trusted partners, has agreed to step in as 70 percent owner of Landcastle Title.”

The memo said FNTG was funding any shortages to accounts and that they were moving forward with “business as usual.”

An attorney representing Morris, Hardwick and Schneider in the lawsuit told Petchenik they could not comment because it was pending litigation.

Hardwick’s attorney, Ed Garland, sent Petchenik a statement about the allegations:

“A civil lawsuit has been filed against Nat Harwick. Nat is not guilty of any improper, illegal or unethical conduct. Nat became aware of a problem with the accounting earlier this summer and immediately alerted his partners and initiated a review by outside auditors.

“Nat is a founder of the firm Morris Hardwick Schneider and has nurtured its growth for over 23 years.  Under Nat’s leadership, the firm grew to 52 offices in thirteen states with eight hundred employees conducting thirty-six thousand yearly transactions involving billions of dollars.

“Anybody who knows Nat knows that he loves the law firm, its employees, the attorneys and the firm’s many loyal clients. He would never knowingly or intentionally take money he was not entitled to or harm the firm or its clients in any way. The firm was profitable, and Nat believed that all of the money he received was properly distributed to him as his share of the profits of the firm.

“The claims made against Nat in this suit are false, and Nat looks forward to clearing his name.”

Garland told Petchenik he was not aware of any law enforcement involvement in investigating the allegations.

Roswell realtor Creed Crutchfield, who has dealt with the firm, told Petchenik allegations such as this makes consumers nervous.

“It just affects everybody in the industry and it makes my job just that much harder,” he said.

Crutchfield said that realty firms are being warned to double-check any closings they had with the firm to ensure everything was handled properly.

“Those real estate agents might want to make sure they check with the companies they closed with to make sure everything is fine for their clients,” he said.

Pacific Ocean Now Dead, Must Watch Video by thenuclearproctologist.org

“HORROR”  “Pacific Ocean Now Dead From Fukushima Radiation”

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1FrscZBjhc&list=TLdJ28vujOJspnMzaADNRXD7_AfpiMeO-H

 Streamed live on Aug 10, 2014

http://www.thenuclearproctologist.org/ The entire 200 kilometers we checked of Canadian Pacific Coast Line was devoid of all life , recovery is highly unlikely . This presentation will be followed tonight with a Q & A session at 8 pm pacific Canada time on this same site beautifulgirlbydana . Watch the live presentation Aug

Information That You Really Should Consider Reading…

Fukushima Documentary 2014 HD ☢ Nuclear Exodus: Pandora’s Promise Was A Lie

Summary: Following the unprecedented triple meltdown at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant after Japan’s 3/11 earthquake and tsunami, a myriad of far reaching questions has arisen…
What’s the current state of the Fukushima nuclear reactors? How much radiation have they already released? What type of health impacts can we expect? Is our seafood supply safe? And what about the other 435 nuclear reactors around the world, 104 in the US alone – 22 of them the same exact design as those that exploded and melted down in Fukushima, are they safe?
Yet these are not easy questions to get answers to. The mainstream media and the internet are full of conflicting viewpoints & information. For example, UN scientists have already claimed that the health impacts of Fukushima will be negligible and statistically insignificant, which is parroted in CNN’s documentary “Pandora’s Promise”. However independent scientists tell a very different story; they project on the order of a million cancers within the next few decades in Japan alone.
So how does such a massive scientific discrepancy occur?
Nuclear Exodus explores the ties that inexorably bind the nuclear power industry to the military industrial complex, and how the lust for nuclear weapons causes governments to push nuclear power on their citizens, while covering up the true health effects of radiation exposure. It delves deep into the legacy & lessons of Chernobyl, nuclear waste management, nuclear terrorism, & solar flares which could potentially trigger hundreds of nuclear meltdowns across the world – threatening life on Earth as we know it.
But can human civilization truly generate the electricity it needs without nuclear power, especially while reducing our energy dependence on fossil fuels? How far have renewable technologies come in 2014 exactly? And if some cataclysmic disaster did threaten the world, would there be anyway to realistically protect life on Earth? Could Mars actually be a feasible back up planet anytime soon?
These questions and more are explored in great depth during Nuclear Exodus: Pandora’s Promise Was A Lie. (This is version 2.2, the most current and up to date version. It’s been tightened up with some important new facts, plus enhanced audio & visuals!)
Like us on Facebook!
**This documentary is for educational purposes only. Contains scenes which some viewers may find very disturbing. Viewer discretion is advised. SpaceX, SolarCity, and Tesla Motors were not involved with the production of this documentary. This documentary was produced in accordance with fair use copyright law under US legal code Title 17 Chapter 1 §107 for educational, news, & non-profit purposes in order to promote the progress of science & useful arts.**
End
Fukushima Documentary 2014 HD ☢ Nuclear Exodus: Pandora’s Promise Was A Lie; via @AGreenRoad
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/06/fukushima-documentary-2014-hd-nuclear.html

Website and email form contact page

A Green Road Project Magazine
– Click in search box in upper right corner and type search term to find any article
– Click on pages in upper left corner to see index of all subjects
Spiritual, Interfaith, Consciousness; How To Create Heaven On Earth
Holistic Living And Green Energy
Exploring the Inner and Outer Mysteries of Life
Peace, War, Human Rights, Justice, Prisons
Drugs, Medicine and GMO’s
Global Corporations And The 1%; Art And Science Of Deception
Nuclear Accidents, Recycling Nuclear Weapons/Fuel
Global Corporations And The 1%; Art And Science Of Deception
Individual Radioactive Elements/Isotopes, USA Radiation Exposure Prevention and Reversal, Music
Low Dose Radiation Dangers/Symptoms For Children And Adults
Uranium Mining and Enrichment – Nuclear Bomb -Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing
Low Level Nuclear Radiation In Food And Water
Effects Of Internal Low Level Nuclear Radiation
Animals and Low Level Radiation Effects
Nuclear Reactor Recertification
Long Term Storage Of Nuclear Fuel, Nuclear Waste

Truth About Judges and Banks, and Why Foreclosure Hell Will Stay, Written by Darwin Bond Graham Great Story

Backing Banks Over Borrowers, California Judges Often Big Stakeholders in Same Banks

Wednesday, 25 June 2014 09:59

By Darwin BondGraham, Truthout | News Analysis
DARWIN BONDGRAHAM (Darwin BondGraham is a sociologist and journalist who covers political economy. He blogs at http://darwinbondgraham.blogspot.com and for washingtonspectator.org.)

http://truth-out.org/news/item/24400-alifornia-judges-ruling-in-favor-of-banks-over-borrowers-often-own-financial-stocks-and-bonds#.U65EgJjg51o.wordpress

Truthout readers like you made this story possible. Show your support for independent news and make a tax-deductible donation today!

Sue your bank in California over a wrongful foreclosure, and the best you’re likely to get – if you have ironclad evidence that it broke the law – is a loan modification. That is, a “win” for the borrower usually means the bank keeps another customer and collects interest payments that are thousands of basis points above the level at which the bank is able to borrow from the Fed. Very often, however, homeowner lawsuits against the banks end in dismissal. In the parlance of the courts, the defendant’s demurrer is sustained. Judges in California’s superior courts often rule in favor of the banks, and the few lawsuits that filter up to the appeals courts and Supreme Court don’t fare any better.
Why do the banks keep winning in court against borrowers alleging wrongful foreclosure, fraud and other abuses? Many borrowers and their lawyers say there’s a judicial bias favoring the banks over homeowners, and that this bias is revealed by the economic position of the judges themselves. Most California judges are wealthy, and many of them hold significant investments in financial corporations and bonds, oftentimes even in the very same banks and mortgage lenders that have been sued by thousands of Californians over alleged fraud, deception and wrongful foreclosure.
Case in point: Baldwin v. Bank of America, a borrower lawsuit alleging wrongful foreclosure that battled all the way to the steps of California’s Supreme Court. In 2007, Marvin Baldwin borrowed half a million dollars from J&R Lending to purchase a small three-unit apartment building in Long Beach, California. It was the height of the real estate bubble. Things quickly fell apart, and Baldwin ran into financial troubles.
In 2009, Bank of America, which by this point had acquired Baldwin’s loan, notified him that he qualified for a federally sponsored HomeSaver Forbearance Program, a temporary bridge toward a permanent loan modification. Baldwin assumed that this was how the taxpayer-funded bank bailouts were translating into assistance for small landlords, so he cooperated with Bank of America and made payments under the program. But late in 2010, Bank of America recorded a notice of default against Baldwin’s loan. Things looked dire.
Then in October, two months after filing the notice of default, Bank of America spun around again and appeared to be offering Baldwin a rescue plan. Bank of America announced a national moratorium on foreclosures due to the bank’s acknowledgement of “irregularities” in its own internal processes. But then Bank of America reversed course yet again. In spite of announcing a moratorium on foreclosures – a moratorium stemming from the robo-signing scandal in which it was revealed Bank of America was routinely breaking the law – Marvin Baldwin’s home was suddenly sold at auction on December 8, 2010.
He filed a lawsuit alleging breach of contract and fraud and sought injunctive relief to save his property. Baldwin alleged in his lawsuit that Bank of America violated California’s Unfair Competition Law, which states, among other things, that a company cannot act in ways that would be likely to deceive a reasonable customer. The foreclosure “moratorium” Bank of America announced was one such deceptive practice because the bank lulled its borrowers into inaction, but then in fact continued to foreclose on properties and sell them, argued Baldwin and his lawyer. A year later, a trial court in Los Angeles sided with Bank of America, ruling the foreclosure and auction were perfectly legal, and that the bank’s actions weren’t deceptive.
Marvin Baldwin and his lawyer Lenore Albert appealed and argued their case before California’s 2nd District Appellate Court. They lost again. The court’s reasoning waded deep into gray areas, interpreting California’s business laws, fraud laws, and real estate laws liberally in the Bank of America’s favor.
Broad Pattern of Bias Seen
Plaintiffs’ attorneys see a broad pattern in California in which the judiciary has routinely sided with the banks, even when the law could be interpreted to prevent or reverse a foreclosure.
“They don’t want to be the judge that allows 40 million mortgages to go back to the borrowers,” said Patricia Rodriguez, a lawyer who has filed homeowner lawsuits against banks and mortgage servicers in multiple California superior courts. “They don’t want to possibly set a precedent.” A single ruling against Bank of America that reverses a foreclosure sale because the bank didn’t follow the letter of the law, for example, could spill over into thousands of other cases and potentially impact the profitability of the entire banking and loan servicing industry in Calfiornia, said Rodriguez.
“It was very clear that there is one form of justice for the small borrower and another form of justice for the moneyed interests,” said Donald Adams, a retired California attorney. “It pains me to say that, but having seen the real estate debacle and the judiciary’s protection of these fraudulent practices, I have reluctantly come to that conclusion.”
As to why the banks so often come out winners, some point to the economic interests of the judges. The average superior court judge in California is paid a salary of about $150,000, but many of the judges are appointed to the bench after years of lucrative private practice where they earned many times this amount of money. Most judges worked as lawyers at large law firms and boutique offices whose clients include major corporations, real estate companies, banks, and others that can pay top dollar. By the time they become judges, most of these lawyers have amassed considerable financial wealth, and like other members of the top 1% of income earners and wealth holders, most judges invest their fortunes in stocks and bonds. And after years of working for corporate clients, many judges have also been steeped in legal and social philosophies that favor the interests of the wealthy above those of consumers and debtors.
It’s impossible to really know why California’s judges have decided so many mortgage fraud and wrongful foreclosure cases in favor of the banks. Certainly it’s a mix of factors, including ideology, but also the existing structure of the legal system that favors wealthy defendants like the banks over isolated and indebted plaintiffs; the banks can afford the best lawyers to represent them, and the biggest banks spend several billion each year lobbying the legislatures of all 50 states and the federal government to shape laws and regulations in their favor. It’s an uneven playing field from the very start. But one possible way to gauge the possibility of bias in the legal system is to look at the economic interests of California’s judges. Unlike ideology, the material interests of the judiciary can be observed and measured. Through their ownership of bonds in financial and mortgage lending companies, many judges own senior claims on debt, debt that is directly tied to the loans of homeowners. Judges also own equity stakes in corporations, the value of which hinges very much on residential mortgage loans and loan-servicing activities.
For example, 42 of California’s 105 appeals court judges own stocks or bonds in financial companies. Seventeen of California’s appeals court judges own stock in Bank of America, while 10 own stock in Citibank, 6 in US Bank, 5 in JPMorgan Chase, and 4 in Wells Fargo. These judges own significant numbers of shares, on average amounting to about $10,000, but some California appeals court judges have revealed in their financial disclosure reports that they own perhaps as much as $1 million in stock in these banks.
The implication here is that many of California’s judges have a financial stake in the profitability of the largest mortgage servicers in the state, the same banks that have been brought before the courts in thousands of cases alleging wrongful foreclosure.
For example, in the Baldwin case, one of the appeals court judges who ruled in favor of Bank of America, Steven Suzukawa, owned as much as $100,000 in Bank of America stock, according to public records. Another of the judges on the three-judge appellate panel that heard the Baldwin case, Norman Epstein, owned as much as $10,000 in Bank of America stock. This was not disclosed, according to parties involved in the case. Under California’s judicial ethics standards, a judge owning more than $1,500 in stock of a company that is party to a lawsuit should recuse themselves from the case.
Baldwin fought on after the setback in the appeals court which was decided in February of this year, petitioning the Supreme Court of California to hear the case. California’s highest court refused to consider the lawsuit, dismissing the petition on May 21.
“I am a bit shocked at the failure to review such a new issue that affects thousands,” wrote Lenore Albert, Baldwin’s counsel, in an email.
One of the Supreme Court judges who was set to decide whether or not Baldwin would be heard had to recuse himself from even making that preliminary decision. Ming Chin, appointed to the California Supreme Court by former Governor Pete Wilson in 1996, disclosed as much as $100,000 worth of stock in Bank of America. Judge Chin also owns stock in Morgan Stanley, the investment bank that sold billions in mortgage-backed securities during the real estate bubble of the 2000s.
Majority of Justices Major Stakeholders in Banks
A majority of California’s Supreme Court justices own major stakes in the banks that service the majority of mortgage loans in the state. Justice Marvin Baxter owns shares of Wells Fargo Bank and Citibank. Justice Carol Corrigan owns shares of Citigroup and part of a business called Redwood Mortgage Investors, a private investment company that owns tens of millions of dollars worth of residential mortgage loans in California. Justice Joyce Kennard owns stock in JPMorgan Chase and Citibank. Justice Kathryn Werdegar owns as much as $1 million in Wells Fargo stock. That makes five of California’s seven Supreme Court justices major investors in the mortgage lending and loan servicing industries.
“I’m so frustrated,” said one lawyer, speaking on the condition of anonymity, about decisions of California’s judges. “I have my team putting together the wall of shame for the judges, how they’re not enforcing the law.”
The state courts, many of them, were individually biased against the consumers,” said retired attorney Don Adams. “The courts were not going to let individual borrowers escape mortgage payments, and were less concerned with stopping the fraudulent and predatory activities that got us into the mess in the first place.”
In 2009, Adams sued Countrywide on behalf of a client who sought to quiet title to their home after a tangled deal of loans involving Countrywide, Citibank, and Bank of America led Countrywide to wrongfully foreclose. Countrywide admitted to foreclosing “in error,” but a trial court found in favor of the bank, forcing the borrowers to sign a new loan agreement with Countrywide. Adams and his clients appealed the decision, but then lost before a panel of three judges in California’s Second Appellate District court. One of the judges, Arthur Gilbert, owned stock in Bank of America and Citibank. Another one of the judges, Kenneth Yegan, disclosed two loans for over $1 million he had taken from Countrywide.
According to Adams, the bias of the courts in favor of the banks existed long before the foreclosure crisis. “Had courts enforced the law against the lenders, the great recession did not have to occur,” he said. “Many of us were after the New Centurys, the Ameriquests, and Countrywides well before the collapse. Even after the economy imploded, most judges did their best to protect the business interests of the predatory lenders by cynically not wanting to let the consumers ‘off the hook’ without recognizing that borrowers would still have to pay a mortgage, but the lenders would have to unwind the loans and do it again. The courts felt that was too much for the fraudsters – and accordingly protected them.”