Friday, March 30, 2007
And That's Not the FIRST Time We've Picked Up the Tab For People Deceiving US & Our Elections
And That's Not the FIRST Time We've Picked Up the the Tab For the Few Deceiving US & Our Elections!
Though there are many, many more examples especially directly by Bob Bennett's singular hand, let's just go with the most recent ones.
Below is the film of the 3/21/07, Bennett-diatribe board meeting,
deflecting the truth from himself under the guise of "defending his employees", where later in the meeting, as the board was approving "vouchers" the matter of the bill from Dominic Vitantonio, Esq., the "defense" lawyer for the one acquitted employee, Grier, came up for approval.
That's right.
• First with mounds of hard-work to compile closely-held evidence that the shows the'04 Ohio election was rigged, even in Cuyahoga, though WE paid the CCBOE for a fair election and the right to retrieve OUR documents;
• then with tens of thousands MORE dollars to pay for, and more volunteer hard work training to volunteer to take part in, a recount that could allow more evidence, but was rigged to be no more than ANOTHER sham;
• and WE had to pay for the prosecutors to try the case to prove that there was a crime committed in just the recount;
• and the convictions of two board employees showed that a jury of 12 people were convinced that the '04 recount WAS a crime AGAINST US;
• NOW WE, THE VICTIMS,HAVE TO ALSO PAY FOR THOSE WOMEN'S DEFENSE!(And in the case of the '04 election, the whole country and planet are the victims of Ohio's "election results")
Guess who's idea that was? Mr. Bennett's! - WITHOUT publicly made board approval - again.
In the letter Mr. Vitantonio, Esq. submitted to the CCBOE to collect his $25,500. payment he quoted the following:Mr. Bennett, alone, signed a letter in August '05 promising payment to the attorneys for all the women who were found innocent, copying them on the letter. He needed to keep them happy and quiet for taking the fall for him.
In August '05 he still thought that he had it all wrapped up. He thought Mason would deal along and not bring it to trial, or at least "fix" it , with judge appointment, or Baxter giving in to "invalid trial" or something so ALL the women would be found innocent.
He would then get away with it, again, to continue his caveman war tactics and partisan agenda as CCBOE chair, again, and the citizens would be happy, think that he was "clean" and "justice"was done ....and would unknowingly pay for THAT whole show, again.
A few election integrity advocates attended the August '05 CCBOE meeting specifically to speak about how appalled we were that the then-only-two indicted (not Maiden yet) non-decision-making employees had been left to take the fall for their superiors.
After an hours-long "executive session,"part of which included Roger Synenberg, and during which we in the hall discussed that this was just like the then-current Abu Grahib military tribunals of soldiers ordered to torture, we were allowed back in.Mr. Bennett tried to prevent us from talking about the case.
I went on, however, reminding him that though I understood why they might not want to speak about it, he could not prevent us, the citizens from putting our comments about it on the record.
I asked then, for many reasons, who was paying for these women's defense- a question that has since become another "elephant in the living room about which no one speaks. " It is, however, the person who authorizes signing the check, who's the entity for whom the attorneys are really working.
Bennett answered clearly and misleadingly in August '05 that the Board of Elections was NOT paying,(and then inferring because) This was a CRIMINAL indictment (emphasis his) on these women.
The thinking of the board/Bennett then was that the board should "distance themselves" from the criminality that would be later found innocent. (Yet they kept the women on the CCBOE payroll and let them keep on working - until the felony convictions of the two.)
Also, you'll see in the below film, that Bennett, in his charge against Mason, ordered the $2,500 trial transcript also without necessary board approval - so he could start combing it for loopholes and mud and could make up unfounded and unsupportable charges, (just as he is in his present "lawsuit" to try to keep his job, for which the taxpayers are again to pay!)
Too bad the Vitantonio issue just came before the board, and the process was explained by Assistant Prosecutor Dave Lambert on 3/21.
After watching and experiencing Bennett for almost three years, I know that without that recent "reminder tip" of how to play "the game", AND to be able to shove more in the face of Mason, he would not have thought of himself. (Bennett does not care about shoving it in the face of citizen/ taxpayers. That's "normal" to him. We're personal "food".)
It's bullying and fear that's gotten him this far - not smarts - even when playing his "game."
Watch your money being used against you here:
Though there are many, many more examples especially directly by Bob Bennett's singular hand, let's just go with the most recent ones.
Below is the film of the 3/21/07, Bennett-diatribe board meeting,
deflecting the truth from himself under the guise of "defending his employees", where later in the meeting, as the board was approving "vouchers" the matter of the bill from Dominic Vitantonio, Esq., the "defense" lawyer for the one acquitted employee, Grier, came up for approval.
That's right.
• First with mounds of hard-work to compile closely-held evidence that the shows the'04 Ohio election was rigged, even in Cuyahoga, though WE paid the CCBOE for a fair election and the right to retrieve OUR documents;
• then with tens of thousands MORE dollars to pay for, and more volunteer hard work training to volunteer to take part in, a recount that could allow more evidence, but was rigged to be no more than ANOTHER sham;
• and WE had to pay for the prosecutors to try the case to prove that there was a crime committed in just the recount;
• and the convictions of two board employees showed that a jury of 12 people were convinced that the '04 recount WAS a crime AGAINST US;
• NOW WE, THE VICTIMS,HAVE TO ALSO PAY FOR THOSE WOMEN'S DEFENSE!(And in the case of the '04 election, the whole country and planet are the victims of Ohio's "election results")
Guess who's idea that was? Mr. Bennett's! - WITHOUT publicly made board approval - again.
In the letter Mr. Vitantonio, Esq. submitted to the CCBOE to collect his $25,500. payment he quoted the following:Mr. Bennett, alone, signed a letter in August '05 promising payment to the attorneys for all the women who were found innocent, copying them on the letter. He needed to keep them happy and quiet for taking the fall for him.
In August '05 he still thought that he had it all wrapped up. He thought Mason would deal along and not bring it to trial, or at least "fix" it , with judge appointment, or Baxter giving in to "invalid trial" or something so ALL the women would be found innocent.
He would then get away with it, again, to continue his caveman war tactics and partisan agenda as CCBOE chair, again, and the citizens would be happy, think that he was "clean" and "justice"was done ....and would unknowingly pay for THAT whole show, again.
A few election integrity advocates attended the August '05 CCBOE meeting specifically to speak about how appalled we were that the then-only-two indicted (not Maiden yet) non-decision-making employees had been left to take the fall for their superiors.
After an hours-long "executive session,"part of which included Roger Synenberg, and during which we in the hall discussed that this was just like the then-current Abu Grahib military tribunals of soldiers ordered to torture, we were allowed back in.Mr. Bennett tried to prevent us from talking about the case.
I went on, however, reminding him that though I understood why they might not want to speak about it, he could not prevent us, the citizens from putting our comments about it on the record.
I asked then, for many reasons, who was paying for these women's defense- a question that has since become another "elephant in the living room about which no one speaks. " It is, however, the person who authorizes signing the check, who's the entity for whom the attorneys are really working.
Bennett answered clearly and misleadingly in August '05 that the Board of Elections was NOT paying,(and then inferring because) This was a CRIMINAL indictment (emphasis his) on these women.
The thinking of the board/Bennett then was that the board should "distance themselves" from the criminality that would be later found innocent. (Yet they kept the women on the CCBOE payroll and let them keep on working - until the felony convictions of the two.)
Also, you'll see in the below film, that Bennett, in his charge against Mason, ordered the $2,500 trial transcript also without necessary board approval - so he could start combing it for loopholes and mud and could make up unfounded and unsupportable charges, (just as he is in his present "lawsuit" to try to keep his job, for which the taxpayers are again to pay!)
Too bad the Vitantonio issue just came before the board, and the process was explained by Assistant Prosecutor Dave Lambert on 3/21.
After watching and experiencing Bennett for almost three years, I know that without that recent "reminder tip" of how to play "the game", AND to be able to shove more in the face of Mason, he would not have thought of himself. (Bennett does not care about shoving it in the face of citizen/ taxpayers. That's "normal" to him. We're personal "food".)
It's bullying and fear that's gotten him this far - not smarts - even when playing his "game."
Watch your money being used against you here:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment