Friday, June 14, 2013

Susan Gets Schooled - posted by Anon



Well Susan, ask Attorney and ye shall  receive . Susan made the following request of Attorney today: 

"If you show me where you refuted something I said, I will happily own my error. Nothing pleases me more than to learn something new and to correct something I have misunderstood. I anxiously await my lesson!"

The following lesson has been provided by the letter "A"



If you show me where you refuted something I said

I have done that repeatedly. You are welcome to review my comments.

I will happily own my error.

That has demonstrably not been your prior practice. Instead, in each case you have run away from the issue, either throwing a childish tantrum or trying to change the subject.

Backing up a few lines:

"I sincerely don't remember you ever REFUTING anything I have said. I remember you QUESTIONING fundamental statements of law, but refuting...no."

You are, yet again, radically mistaken. On the past two comment threads in which we have conversed, I have either refuted your statements or exposed the baseless presumptions inherent in them over and over again. This is obvious to anyone who simply reads the threads, but given your convenient lapses of memory whenever accuracy would prove to be troublesome to you, it would appear to be useful to refute you yet again. Which is what I now intend to do.


Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #1 (June 10):

Your "WTF Missouri" comment sounded like you thought it highly unusual that they don’t follow the FRCP rule numbers.


Attorney response:

It communicated nothing of the kind. Instead, it conveyed my feeling that categorizing the overwhelmingly common Motion to Dismiss under the unwieldy rule number 55.27 is notably convoluted and ugly. What I said is that Rule 55.27 is "a terrible name." You bizarrely inferred from that statement that I was surprised and/or previously unaware that some states "don’t follow the FRCP rule numbers"—a notion that finds no support in my "terrible name" comment.

To the contrary, all of three paragraphs above my "terrible name" comment, I had specifically pointed out that Missouri might not "follow the FRCP rule numbers":

So, again presuming that somebody has been properly served, my guess is that we’ll see a motion to dismiss (also known, though maybe not in Missouri (?), as a "Rule 12 motion") reasonably soon.

Where in the world you got the idea that I needed to be informed that different states number their procedural rules differently I have no idea.

--

You made a statement. I refuted it. You responded by running away and and have thenceforth entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #2 (June 10):

As far as I can tell "Attorney" and Life in Pierce County are in good standing here, meaning they have not yet dared to disagree with any of your [Ginger Snap’s] doctrine[.]


Attorney response :

False. I have openly disagreed with and corrected Ginger repeatedly on this blog. I have, however, done all that with somewhat more tact than you apparently feel moved to display.

--

You made a statement. I refuted it. You responded by running away and and have thenceforth entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #3 (June 10):
Statement  :

I don’t see you [Ginger Snap] taking the time to explain to them [Attorney and Stacy “Life in Pierce County” Emerson] why their request to stop the anon posting will not be granted.


Attorney response  :

I have never requested that Ginger "stop the anon posting." I don’t recall seeing Ms. Emerson make any such request, either. I have no interest in telling the proprietor of this forum how he ought to run it. She and I, instead, have suggested that commenters on this blog post under pseudonyms (or their real names, if they prefer) rather than anonymously.

--

You made a statement. I refuted it. You responded by running away and and have thenceforth entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #4 (June 10):
Statement :

All I’m saying is that since you [Ginger Snap] DO claim to respect them [Attorney and Stacy "Life in Pierce County" Emerson], I would expect you to have the courtesy to respond to their suggestions/queries.

Attorney response :

To reiterate, I have no expectation that Ginger will respond in any way at all to the Attorney/Emerson suggestion that commenters here eschew anonymous posting in favor of pseudonymous posting. I did not direct that suggestion to Ginger, and I do not consider it the slightest bit disrespectful of him not to have responded to it.

When I have criticized and/or corrected Ginger on issues other than this one, I have found his responses to be entirely respectful and appropriate—which is not to say that we agree on all of the issues involved; in fact, I gather we don’t. I believe and hope that Ginger feels that my submissions have been likewise respectful.

--

You made a statement. I refuted it. You then ran away and entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #5 (May 27):

Statement  :

Missouri has no interest in and therefore no power to compel an out of state ISP to provide the identity of an out of state poster unless the offending post somehow targeted or involved Missouri.


Attorney response  :

It’s simply obvious (isn’t it?) that any statement posted on the internet "involve[s] Missouri," in that anything posted on the internet is available to and therefore, at least in theory, is read in Missouri.

To the extent that Windsor’s lawsuit is a defamation lawsuit, the publication element—i.e., the transmission of the allegedly defamatory statement to someone other than the publisher himself—clearly "involve[s] Missouri," because all of the relevant statements were published in Missouri as well as everywhere else on the planet that has unfettered access to the internet.

So declaring that Missouri "has no interest in" Windsor’s claims "unless the offending post somehow targeted or involved Missouri" simply begs the question: does an internet defamation suit like this necessarily "involve[ ]" Missouri?

--

You made a statement. I exposed the unfounded presumption inherent in that statement. You claimed that you would address the problem ("before I take the time to support my comment on thejurisdictional issue...."), but you never did. You then ran away (covering your cowardly retreat with a sneering insult—I will refrain from listing the flaws in your hypothesis, but itis clear that as you say, torts and PJ are not your forte”) and entirely failed to address the issue.
Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #6 (May 28):

Statement :

[I]t is my understanding that your practice does not involve civil litigation.


Attorney response  :

You are mistaken. My practice involves almost nothing but civil litigation.

--

You made a statement. I both refuted and exposed the baseless overconfidence inherent in that statement. You then ran away and entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #7 (May 29):

Statement  :

Interested readers [of my declarations] can always ask for more detail[.]

A simple request for clarification would have been sufficient.



Attorney response :

Interested readers are also capable of being badly misled by (presumably unintentional) implications of few-word contributions that lack relevant nuance. Oversimplified legal analyses can be very dangerous, as I hope you recognize.

[....]

Readers without an extensive legal background had no idea that "a simple request for clarification" was even necessary to elucidate issues that you glossed over.

Presuming, as it appears, that you don't have a relevant citation regarding the application of the International Shoe doctrine to internet defamation cases, I don't particularly need further clarification from you. The people who do need it wouldn't know that they need to ask you for it. Such are the pitfalls of oversimplification.

--

You made a statement. I exposed the baseless overconfidence inherent in that statement. You then ran away and entirely failed to address the issue.

Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #8 (May 28):


Statement :

I don’t recall seeing any citations in your posts here.


Attorney response  :

Again, you’re mistaken. I have in fact posted a handful of citations in my contributions to this blog.

--

You made a statement. I both refuted and exposed the baseless overconfidence inherent in that statement. You then ran away and entirely failed to address the issue.



Refutation/Exposure of Baseless Overconfidence #9 (May 29):

Statement  :

I was speaking about the scenario you mentioned, where Windsor, who has no ties to Missouri, attempts to bring claims there against an out of state defendant, who presumably lacks sufficient general contacts with Missouri.

Attorney response :

First, the International Shoe standard only requires sufficient contacts, not sufficient general contacts, in order to meet the Constitutional requirement for personal jurisdiction. In order to defeat a personal jurisdiction defense, Windsor would not need to demonstrate that Missouri has general jurisdiction over any defendant.

Second, how can you possibly "presume" that the defendants lack sufficient contacts with Missouri? Windsor has explicitly alleged that the defendants have continually defamed him on the internet. Both the internet and the allegedly defamatory statements the defendants posted on it are widely available in Missouri. Are those facts not enough to establish sufficient contacts (or even sufficient general contacts) with Missouri—for the purposes of Missouri’s long-arm statute and state and federal case law pertaining to personal jurisdiction?

--

You made a statement. I exposed the baseless overconfidence inherent in that statement. I also directly exposed the fact that you had applied an irrelevant legal standard to the question—an error that would, under some factual circumstances, destroy your entire argument. You then ran away and entirely failed to address either issue.

Indeed, in response to the above refutations and exposures of your errors, you elected not to address any of your mistakes but rather to throw your infamous "
as I read through your various posts, I can see that yourknowledge is far more advanced than mine" tantrum. As I’ve indicated more than once since, such a petulant and childish response is an indicator of the confidence you have in your ability to discuss matters relevantly and rationally, not to mention a signal that your motives on this blog have nothing to do with conducting respectful discussion or seeking the truth.

To conclude, then:


As I said and have now proved, Anonymous, I have repeatedly refuted and/or exposed the baseless overconfidence inherent in statement after statement you have posted on this blog. And your unceasing tendency in response has been to duck and dodge every issue, not infrequently utilizing insults and tantrums to cover your cowardly escape. In the long list, above, of your misstatements and my corrections of same, you have not once admitted error or even communicated anything short of overwhelming confidence in your declarations.

In short, as I have now demonstrated, your entire behavior with regard to me (not that you've treated anyone else here any better) reveals you to be a coward, a boor, and a troll. A duty to defend the image of my profession (not to mention to protect the public from your miseducation) may force me in the future to respond to you in order to continue refuting your fallacies and exposing your thoughtlessness, but clearly your behavior is not worth anyone's time.

174 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Actually I felt this was rather interesting as it ties some of Attorney's posts into one post rather than people having to dig fo them. There is a lot of content on here. Almost daily posts with 50-200+ comments per post. And no offense Attorney - some of your posts are rather windy? I enjoy reading them but they are rather long and you tend to use extremely long sentences. Call it old age or adhd or whatever, but i tend to get sidetracked. Thanks for putting this together gingersnap :-)

      ~Jane Doe 868~

      Delete
    2. Another dumb ass useless troll, probably Web.

      Delete
    3. 3:58 comment was meant for 3:40

      Delete
    4. Jane Doe 868, I don't believe the Attorney could make his point without going into detail. I appreciate reading all of his posts.

      Delete
    5. I agree anon @ 4:00. I just seem to suffer from wandering mind lol. I guess I will open the door now for Susan to post something about me on her one pony woman blog? Yes Susan I did say my mind wanders. I have tons of thoughts swirling around in my brain therefore it is at times difficult for me to concentrate on long posts on a blog. I will rea attorney's posts several times though, so I can get the idea he is trying to present.

      ~Jane Doe 868~

      Delete
    6. Anonymous @3:58:
      And no offense Attorney - some of your posts are rather windy?

      No offense taken. It's an occupational hazard.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous @5:03:
      I haven't read the list of "refutations" yet, but I glanced at them and saw they include much more than refuted statements of law.

      Neither you nor I limited our statements about refutations (and exposures of overconfident baselessness) to "statements of law." You have running out lines of nonsense, and I have been taking them apart, on several different subjects—as the above list demonstrates.

      Your sudden swerve into concentrating on "statements of law" is yet another cowardly retreat from owning up to your thoughtlessness and error.

      I have some criticism of some of your legal statements as well. Later!

      Even if you do "have some criticism," it remains a fact that you have been refuted, and you responded by running away... and then conveniently "forgetting" the entire exchange. Your behavior thus was, and remains, disgraceful trollery.

      Delete
    8. @ Attorney: What are some of the reasons people flunk out of law school?

      Delete

    9. Another bad chip dip episode Susan? It seems to be happening more and more, you should see someone about your delusions, they seem to be much worse than little Willy's.

      Delete
    10. Susan is a TrollJune 15, 2013 at 9:51 AM

      LMAO Susan. Really, that is your deduction of why your posts got deleted? I'm thinking that your posts are getting deleted because we are tired of reading you nonsensical crap, and you sidestepping the fact that you got "schooled" like no other. This isn't an Educate Stupid Susan blog. Oh, I know, you don't have anyone chit chatting with you on your own, so you think you an monopolize this one. WRONG!

      It was fun for a hot second watching attorney hand you your ass on a platter though, and you still not owning your shit. But, why would you ever? You are a self absorbed, arrogant, narcissist type person, perhaps with some anti social personality disorder and a touch of introvert.

      Your Willy didn't want you, or your superior opinion of yourself and your self worth. (which is saying a lot, since Willy likes to use people, but he didn't have any use for you) So, don't go away mad, just go away.

      Delete
  2. Susan Harbison February 19, 2013 at 11:31 AM:
    Anon, could you put some kind of signature at the end of all of your posts so that we can tell you apart from all of the other anons? If you do that, we can learn "who you are".

    Susan Harbison February 19, 2013 at 1:02 PM:
    I'm not the least bit interested in the anon's identity. But interestingly, only last week I saw some of the regulars asking the anon's to do the same thing.

    This "new anon" clearly wants to develop an identity here. When she posts something, she wants people to connect it back to her previous posts and to her radio appearance. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the easiest way to accomplish that is to sign some kind of name under each post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bravo! Can we hool dog blog too? LMAO :-). So tired of the messiah complex thing so prevelant today. And yesterday. And the day before. Hell it's been going on for years now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That should be school - not hool lol

      Delete
    2. Okay I am Jane doe 868 lol.

      Delete
  4. Pie Man Zombie HunterJune 14, 2013 at 4:26 PM

    the other day, I google her and the dog blog came up, can anyone check tracker to see if a PMA blog and the dog blog and her are all the same?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. who cares -why does the dog blog matter

      Delete
    2. It matters because this blog at the moments is exposing billtards ntics. Some of his antics include the dog blog and Janice of pm. Go to wearenotwolves.blogspot.com to see the indirect ties between Janice, lb, bill and the dog blog. That old saying - if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and has webbed feet like a duck - it is probably a duck. Janice is a duck - she is using this time of weakness in some AMPP members that was created by bill in order to tear down and destroy AMP

      ~Jane Doe 868~
      ~Jane Doe868

      Delete
  5. I posted on a Facebook comment in defense of someone a statement that holds very true here. Susan - you might feel yu are highly intelligent and we anons and joeys are all wrong, but that is your opinion. As I have been trying to tell janice and pma followers for years now - the current followers might feel she did not abuse or use them, but i feel she used me. I feel she used me to do internet stuff (her words) that she did not have time to do or she did not have the ability to do because it was above her knowledge level. I feel she used me in order to cltivate contact that I had built up in order to gain knowledge in order to help myself with my case and later on to help other people who solicited me or to whom I was introduced.

    I feel she was a horrible person for alluding to the fact that lundy would be on board to help moms who have horrible cases - like mine was at that time. I feel she has been a horrible person in exposing moms names and falsely attributing work online to them when a) the person did indeed do the work and did not want the credit due to safety concerns, or b) did not do the work.

    I feel Janice is being petty and spiteful. If you go back through the entire 4 years since myself, L, C and the other C parted ways from her, you will find no PUBLIC mention of her or her group. However she waits until some of the more active moms are thrown under that proverbial bus when bill did what he did and choose that very moment to attack? Everyone who did not have billy-itis saw what he did to people was wrong and very underhanded. Janice took that instant to go on a hate voyage down memory lane and go in for the kill as it were. AMPP is not down though, not by a long shot. Go to wearenotwolves.blogspot.com to see the lily white character that Janice is trying to portray to all of her followers, indeed to anyone who will listen. She has a Joan of arc/messiah complex. She wants all the glory, yet she will not do the dirty work.

    I have stated before in public and private that i think Janice runs the dog blog. I no longer think that. Why you ask? Because she is simply to lazy to get her hands dirty with doing any type of work, and those of us who run blogs, know that running a big is nt easy work.

    Plus she is not internet savvy enough to be able to set that blog up and manage it the way it is managed. But the person running it is directly tied to her in some way. There are some pretty good candidates out there - Gayle, ej, Marlene, Julia (oops Marlene and Julia are the same person) her web design person - the one who claims that they did all the graphic work for pma and pma never asked the oz mom to do anything for pma (crap I have emails).

    So my message to the Susan's, bills, Janice, Gayle, ejs, Julia's out there. Keep it up. You are going to destroy the work of cppa, molc and AMPP and many others out there and we will have to start all over from scratch. Is this what you want?

    Janice and those supporting her - you have no right to tell me that my feelings of being abused by her are not valid and did not happen. They are very real and they did happen. Janice is just better at doing it than bill is, he blasts stupidity on the internet, Janice does it all behind the scenes. I almost prefer bills brand because I can see his coming. It might heut initially but at least it is out there. Janice is slcik and conniving and flat out vicious in her attacks.

    ~Jen~

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm Anon 3:40 and it is boring and I did yawn. So what?

    I tune in because I enjoy the BW bashing - not sophomoric legal opinions.

    So... take my input for what you paid for it. I'm not trying to change your choice of blogging topic. Just look forward to reading about the train wreck antics of BW.

    Get off your high horse, Clubhouse. JIALK isn't exactly the Drudge Report...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For the record, items 7 and 8 are out of order—and the fault lies with me; I mis-numbered them in my comments that are reproduced in the OP here.

      Delete
    2. Good idea 521. You start?

      Delete
    3. "I know you are. So what am I?"

      Delete
    4. You're hated around here 5:21. Go back to slumming with your bottom feeding friends.

      Delete
    5. yes susan how does it feel to be hated by so many?

      Delete
    6. Orgasmatic. Sends a thrill up my leg.

      Delete
    7. If these clowns could only read a packet sniffer.

      Delete
  7. In other news...Billy fails to see the irony and heed Karma:


    I left Atlanta on June 14, 2012.

    I received quite an "anniversary" gift. I was notified that I am now officially divorced.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And one need only google her name to see that he is already in violation of those divorce papers.

      Delete
  8. Brian is not quite getting it. Bill is not going to help anyone. He's stalling. He doesn't want you all to figure out, that you all are just funding his never ending vacation. 365 days on the road, and zip, nada, nothing. Just a bunch of useless youtube videos to make you all still think he is working, which Robert also doesn't get.

    Brian Long bill why havent you helped anyone yet i have asked for your help for quite some time now and nothing so are you helping others.

    Bill Windsor Thanks, Robert. Brian, I can rarely focus on anything except just what's right in front of me or over the next hill. There is no other way for me to handle things. It's just me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian Long, long on blather, short on punctuation.

      Delete
    2. Well, he's more likely to have Superman drop down from the sky than for Bill to keep his promises. And will you look at that! Guess who's in the theatres this month, and who is not.

      Delete
    3. That's pretty good! He has a hard target of June 20 to hit as he babbles on his own IMDB page...

      Delete
  9. LOL Lisa, that would mess up his whole lie the other day, when he said he was going to see her.

    Lisa Snow Hagner Bill - do you want to stop there for a moment and help Connie Fielding - who was kidnapped this week and put into a Psych Ward in Ogden as she exposed some Illegal Crime in Utah...
    about an hour ago

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL- it's not kidnapping, it's called an involuntary commitment... and sanity is not Billy the boobs strong suit...

      In the land of the lemmings, passing a psych eval will get you booted out...

      Delete
    2. Kidnapped? oooooook then *scratches head*

      Wait, is this like when Connie Bedwell was illegally arrested for driving drunk because it was her daughters birthday and she was only 3 blocks from home?

      Delete
    3. "..as she exposed some Illegal Crime in Utah..."

      Isn't this kinda redundant?

      Delete
    4. I see the self absorbed sponge like Susan in back...hey suzie, why are you here? You have your own little blog, how about you go argue with yourself over there?


      Hiya Yappy, any news from the CONster?

      Delete
    5. Hey Oceans! Her perverted sicko serial child raping daddy is set to start trial June 24th. I heard he was beaten yet again but no broken jaw this time around. I hope the prosecution pushes for the trial, he's pulled enough shit to delay. Time to pay the piper ya know!

      Connie's doing her usual manipulative antics the only way she knows how. Too bad for her I'm always 15 steps ahead. I spoke to a government official in Sacramento the other day. Connie was trying to "worm" her way into their good graces with her little scam due to the CPS audit happening. I was OVERLY pleased with their response. Will post a letter on the blog soon.

      How's life in your corner of the world?

      Delete
    6. yappy is DANCING!June 14, 2013 at 11:49 PM

      (Oops Oceans, the above is yappy)

      It wouldn't let me post first time around hahahaha........the spam filters must be turned on super warp speed what with all the stench and wannabe leeches hanging around. Ain't it sweet to be THIS popular. All the sick trolls keep scratching at our clubhouse door :)

      I'm in the dancing mood. Where's our clubhouse video again????

      >>> OH here it is! https://vimeo.com/65848353

      Delete
    7. It's hot...and hotter... so far this week we have had 111, 113 and 112 but it's cooled off to 104 right now..

      LOL- Connie is still trying to get her way? look forward to the updates doll! Timmy's trial should be pretty intense...

      Delete
    8. eeeek! that hot already? Sounds like a long summer ahead. Do you at least have a pool?

      I cannot imagine his trial. Want to wager a bet which day she gets tossed out of the courtroom? I'm guessing day 2.

      Then again, her daddy is actually THEE Elijah reincarnated so I'm sure he'll find his lightning bolt thingymajingy to get himself (and herself) out of their self-created court troubles.

      Delete
    9. No pool, but there is a lake here...LOL

      I am thinking she can make it to day three before she gets her warnings and ejection...I am betting the bigger problem will be how long can timmy be in the courtroom before they have to warn him to STFU...

      I hope this trial goes quickly, I dread the testimony of the children, and the crazy/vile questions they will be subjected to. So sad they will have to go through this.

      Delete
    10. I can't imagine what those children will be subjected to. The first public defender dropped his ass. I think she was terrified of him and all his demands but that's rumor and speculation. If my PACER acct doesn't have updates (who knows with Alaska) I can't wait until the trial is done so the court records will be available. This is 1 time Connie can't SEAL anything from the public.

      I'm certain there will be justice. Did you see he's trying to suppress his statements to the arresting officer? I have a suspicion what he wants to hide but will have to wait until trial to see if my hunch is correct.

      Delete
    11. it doesn't surprise me she was scared of him...or that he is trying to take back what he said...it's a family trait

      Someday everyone will know all the details about Connie and her lies..

      Delete
    12. Anonymous at 1229 am got a question for you about Pacer. Can you look up any name in any state? How does that work? I have access to a Pacer account but only for a very limited time and want to make the most of it when i go use it.

      ~Jen~

      Delete
  10. WARNING EVERYONE: I'm pretty sure that anyone who logs into this blog gets the gift of a cookie and and/or other spyware.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not all browser cookies are spyware; don't you know that?

      Delete
    2. The one word response works too! :-)

      Delete
    3. Ok. Did you know a ginger snap is a cookie? And yeah, you get a cookie. You can disable them if you like. All it does is tell the stat counter that you are a repeat visitor and to not count you as a new number. OMG CONSPIRACY!!!!

      tard

      Delete
    4. How many cookies does it take to count visitors? I understand this site loaded three on to my computer during one visit. I like cookies, but really.

      Delete
    5. Go ahead and lie. I invite all people who come to this blog to check their "cookies." They won't see any. I was mistaken when I said there was one in the tracker. We have that option, but it's turned off. I checked my own and I have none. If you have one it's probably from your own account with blogger. But, you'd have to be internet savvy to understand.

      Delete
    6. It's not a lie. I picked up three cookies from you.

      Delete
    7. What the hell are you talking about Webb?

      Delete
    8. You gave me cookies.

      Delete
    9. I think you are going to have to be a little more specific

      Delete
    10. I had my computer completely cleared of "security risks", I logged on to your site, and when I logged off I was told I had 3 new "security risks."

      Delete
    11. You're full of shit. Quit trying to start bs rumors Webb

      Delete
    12. I wish you had an idea of how stupid that sounds, but I guess it makes perfect sense to you. Maybe you need to get rid of your spyware remover that is in fact spyware

      Delete
    13. And you aren't "logged on" to anything, moron.

      Delete
    14. Maybe someone gave you cookies, and you unwittingly gave them to me.

      Delete
    15. Do you even understand cookies? All they do is tell the site you have been there before. Feel free to set your internet not to allow them.

      Delete
    16. First you say there is a cookie counter, then you say you were wrong and there isn't one, now you are again saying there is one. Talk about cookie confusion.

      Delete
    17. There isn't one on my computer from the site, no. Because I am technologically savvy unlike you. I have 3rd party cookies turned off. I only allow 1st party cookies on my computer.

      But yes, I just checked on a third party website and found that there is a cookie from google analytics, statcounter, and blogspot.uk. So TURN OFF YOUR 3RD PARTY COOKIES IF IT MATTERS SO MUCH TO YOU MORON.

      Here is a summary of the cookie from StatCounter. I can't do a thing about the ones that google already uses. Talk to them.

      "A cookie is a small text file. When a person visits a site (with StatCounter code) a cookie is placed in the browser of that visitor. This cookie is then used solely to determine the first time, returning and unique visits to that site. The cookie is not used for any other purpose."

      Delete
    18. I don't remember any of us making a definitive statement for or against having a "cookie counter". If you are asking do we have an IP tracker...I think I have made that quite clear for a long time the answer is yes

      Delete
    19. I guess not since one of the statements made previously about someone miss peaking has been deleted. Oh, you are a nefarious bunch.

      Delete
    20. Webb doesn't want to be tracked. The answer is simple. Leave and never come back, you were BANNED and told never to come back just like your retarded friend Susan. What part of that don't you understand? Adios

      Delete
    21. Ginger didn't unban you.

      Delete
    22. She said she did.

      Delete
    23. I'm sure Ginger will make it crystal clear you were banned and not welcomed back. Just because you could get around the IP blocker did not mean you were welcome back. Leave, no one wants you here ever again.

      Delete
    24. yeah both you and Susan were banned....no clemency was granted. The fact that neither one of you can stay away from this site is a testament to just how obsessed with it you both really are.

      Delete
    25. I don't think nefarious is a fair description. It's not like we are going outside the clubhouse to pick fights with other people.

      Truth be told, if I had to pick between Webb and Susan, I'd take Webb any day of the week over Susan. I know Webb has it in him to play nice, if he really wants to. Susan is incapable, without professional help. And some really good drugs. IMO, of course.

      Delete
    26. Of course those who are foresworn social conventions, are under no obligation to use new fangled inventions.

      Delete
  11. ha ha. WARNING proxybutton.com is not a very good proxy. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. spiders aren't smart at all

      Delete
    2. Spiders are quite crafty, actually.

      Delete
    3. not the one we know, that one is brainless

      Delete
    4. Smart enough to outwit you any hour or day of the week.

      Delete
    5. not a chance

      Delete
    6. Keep on thinking those positive thoughts. It makes you more vulnerable to the Spider.

      Delete
    7. You're the biggest Investigative reporter idiot I've ever heard of. Goes to some old woman thinking it was Gingersnaps mother? Talk about major dumb ass.

      Delete
    8. and reports dip shit stuff back to Daddy Dauben, even dumber. Trying to piece things together who's who on the blog. Reading that joke of a Webb "secret report" was the best laugh I've had in a long while.

      Delete
    9. You weren't just off, you were 10000 of miles off with every hunch. Damn that's a special kind of stupid going on.

      Delete
    10. Yeah, I think Joey had me nailed as 2 different people AND one of Gingersnap's many personalities. But, I thought it was Daddy Dauben passed that info on to Bill.

      Delete
    11. No this blog didn't post anything that was in the report. And the report made it very clear what Webb felt was accurate. Not inaccurate. Spin how you want Webb. It was hilarious to see how wrong you were and how stupid you are.

      Yes NBTDT it was ultimately Daddy Dauben that gave it to Windsor but all that report info came from webb who confirmed the information to our identities correct.

      Webb is trying to cover his dumb ass

      Delete
    12. Yep, you are right. Joey posted all the names. Daddy, Bill and Webb all working from info Joey pulled out his a$$.

      Delete
    13. And lets not forget, Billy SHARED that secret memo. I lose IQ points every time I think about that.

      Delete
  12. Ya know, IMDB has a pretty liberal comment policy on discussing movies, whether real or imagined.

    Just saying...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who knows if it tracks IPs . . . . just sayin'

      Delete
    2. Think of it as a public service.

      Just saying...

      Delete
    3. to Bill Windsor?

      Delete
    4. You should see the hateful things posted for real stars. Somehow they all manage to go on with their careers.

      Delete
    5. Public service to those who might actually look up that asshole, not to mention helping with the crowd control at theaters on the 20th...

      Also would be a blow to BW's ego.

      Just saying...

      Delete
  13. I like to own my shit, then after I've gotten all the use out of it I can get, I donate it to the less fortunate. Cuz I'm a giver.

    ( can someone tell me why this is still getting Attention? DO NOT FEED THE DOG AND IT WILL EITHER GO AWAY OR DIE)

    GOOOOOD MORNING JOEYS! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Great post - I'm glad to see Attorney's response to Susan get front page attention. It takes a lot of time and effort to formulate complete, yet concise, explanations for the 1/2 a$$ statements Susan makes. I appreciate the concern Attorney has for getting it right. Especially because people tied to Bill (in one form or another, past and present that have ended up here) want to address their issues in court pro se. Susan is probably a perfect example of why so many pro se litigants lose their cases.

    As regards to Susan's taunting and insulting people with higher intellect, it is annoying. But on the other hand maybe we should be flattered. If she didn't see us as worthy of her attention in some respect why would she bother? Personally, I am always extremely amused when I bother someone like Susie. Look at how she refers to me. My initials are NBTDT, 5 letters. But Susie takes more time to type my name when she thinks of me, she calls me NBwhatever, 10 letters. Every time I read that, I LMAO. I WIN!!!

    Back to the Anonymous postings: I gave up on the issue a long time ago. But, I agree with Attorney & Stacey - regular contributors really should be more courteous, find a name a stick with it. I find only one exception, that would be the situation like Anon 6/14 10:52 PM response to the the stupid Anon post about cookies.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dearest Susan, despite your always stupid assumptions, attorney made no such request to have your comments deleted. There were however many many other such requests. The general concensus is that Susan believes that she is much smarter than she is and refuses to be proven wrong even when it is presented in black and white.

    You were given the lesson you requested. You learned nothing. I am done with you.

    Glad you had your meltdown while Ginger was out for a couple of days. Thanks for that! Bye bye now!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dearest Susan, despite your always stupid assumptions, attorney made no such request to have your comments deleted.

      I'm supposed to have done what now?

      As I've said in previous comments, I've never made any request or suggestion to Ginger (or OReader or anyone else relevant) about how this blog should be run. That's very much not my business.

      If the administrators here decide(d) to ban particular commenters from posting, that's very much their right. If they decide to let all comments through, that's their discretion as well. This is their forum, and we should all expect to abide by their rules. If at some point any of us disagrees with the way the forum is run, we can leave.

      Delete
    2. yeah thats about the gist of it, Susan is back in to the delete pile since she is only interested in insults and personal attacks, so she is claiming that you asked me to do that since you just can't compete with her superior debating skills. Its her world I guess, she can make up whatever she wants....she just can't bring it here.

      Delete
  16. I can't find anything on Connie Fielding re: commitment to the hospital. Not for lack of trying, don't want y'all to think I'm slacking.....

    There is some interesting stuff re: Misty, Dennis & Haylee Cheek. Misty & Dennis Cheek appear to be RE/MAX Realtors.

    Bill posted some background photos for his story on the Cheek family: I didn't find (didn't really look either) what Bill's story is about. But noted that he has misspelled Haylee's name. I'm guessing the story is re: claims of corruption in Iron County Utah that resulted in a law suit filed by Haylee and another plaintiff against 30+ government defendants for conspiracy and civil rights violations. If somebody knows differently, please don't hesitate to correct.

    The court agrees that Haylee's case against Iron County should be heard, as it wasn't dismissed based on the defendants' motion. Based on one of her complaints, I agree. But, there aren't any facts attached to the docs I read, just allegations. And, her case against the government really should be considered in context of her contact history with the DA's office, the drug task force and LE.

    In the civil suit Haylee is objecting to the way she was treated after she was detained by the drug Task Force. The detention occurred in 2010 a few months prior to the start of Haylee's trial for charges related to 2007 incidents of aggravated robbery, aggravated kidnapping, sexual battery, aggravated assault, possession or use of amphetamines, theft of a vehicle or firearm, and fraudulent use of a credit card.

    In 2008 one of the other actors in the 2007 incidents was charged with witness tampering. In their report of the charges, KSL News mentions Haylee and says she "has an extensive criminal record".

    With respect to the 2007 incidents, basically it appears Haylee and some pals kidnapped a drug dealer and performed a body cavity search for hidden meth. Oh yeah, and they stole some stuff. Haylee was convicted, by a jury, on all counts listed above and sentenced to serve six years to life plus an additional one to 15 years consecutively in the Utah State Prison. Then, Haylee filed the civil suit, with the DA's name listed first.

    Two things that aggravate my already poor opinion of this family, in case the attached links are too much reading for anyone: (1) It appears that Haylee's criminal adventure included her 1 year old child. (2) When Dennis spoke on Haylee's behalf at the trial, he spoke about and to the victim, saying that she should be punished for selling drugs. The Judge cut him off and said his comments were inappropriate.

    http://ironcountytoday.com/bookmark/8800062-Cheek-found-guilty-in-2007-case

    http://ironcountytoday.com/view/full_story/10502018/article-Haylee-Cheek-sentenced-to-7-years-to-life

    http://ut.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20110321_0000237.DUT.htm/qx

    http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/utah/utdce/2:2010cv00508/75419/102/0.pdf?1314982429

    http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=2463918

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for confirming that lack of findings on Connie Fielding...I feel better now that I am not alone ;)

      All I found was this:
      Devout Mormon Grandmother kidnapped by LDS Church Leader....Connie Fielding is being held hostage at McKay-Dee Hospital Psych Ward for exposing judicial corruption in Utah. Connie is a whistle blower exposing family court DCFS corruption Nation Wide and in Utah. Exposing corruption within the Mormon GOP Elite in the State. She is being held hostage at McKay-Dee with no mental illness.

      Listen to audio recording. They are just trying to shut her up and lock her away!


      As far as the Haylee Cheek- wowsers...what a fun person! Kidnapping with body cavity searches are something I have never heard of before. But then I never heard of a 6 years to life sentence either- so firsts are covered for today(I try to learn something new every day).

      Delete
    2. Oh, the video Bill posted on Wednesday, the one where he was giddy leaving a message for the DA - that was for the DA that prosecuted Haylee. Bill was with Haylee's parents when he filmed himself leaving the voice mail message.

      Yeah, I would have ignored Bill too. Apparently Bill thinks Haylee is innocent based on his "research". This is what Bill wrote about the DA last October:

      http://lawlessamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1193:iron-county-utah-attorney-scott-garrett-to-star-in-lawless-americathe-movie-named-one-of-the-most-corrupt-attorneys-in-america&catid=133:lawless-america-the-movie&Itemid=105

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ68Za_LEGo&feature=youtu.be

      Delete
    3. Oh that video? We couldn't decide if he was sporting makeup or a sun burn.

      Delete
  17. SUSAN, Ginger is not here today. That's why you are being deleted.

    Adios!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're the greatest Oreader :D

      Delete
  18. Susan I'm so sad that your blabbering shit is getting deleted...I so wanted to waste a min. of my life reading it....but hey it's even funner knowing no one has to waste a precious min. on your crap

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah who gives a crap about that 'thing'. She's nuts. Adios no amigo.

      Delete
    2. awww Susan...who said I don't understand it....I just think anything period that comes out of your mouth is blabbering...you obviously have no comprehension skills

      Delete
  19. @Attorney all the clubhouse girls think your hot, or some shit and want a picture of you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hahaha LB, you brat.

      Delete
    2. He is such a brat but he is our brat lol. He is kind of like how I envisioned my son would be had I been allowed to raise him.

      ~Jen~

      Delete
    3. I thought attorney was a chick. Lol. Silly me.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, folks: I'm happily married, and Mrs. Attorney (who's not an attorney) and I have a beautiful baby. That's one big reason I haven't checked in here on the blog since Friday; it was a busy first Father's Day weekend.

      I'm not lookin' for love. I am somewhat frequently in need of more plain old sleep, though. Teething gums can be very cruel things, especially in the middle of the night.

      Delete
  20. New edict, update and billshit from Bitler

    Lawless America
    about an hour ago
    LAWLESS AMERICA MOVIE ROAD TRIP II -- UTAH UPDATE:

    Due to scheduling problems with Father's Day weekend. those who have not been interviewed in the Salt Lake City area will be interviewed starting at 1 pm Monday, June 17, 2013. If you are in the database, the address of the hotel (near the Salt Lake City International Airport) will be emailed to you. Please come at 1 pm or as soon thereafter as you can. I will end filming when there is no one left waiting.

    Folks in Price and towns near Salt Lake City, you will need to come here on Monday, too. My only road trip will be to see Connie Fielding.

    On Tuesday, I will either go to Denver as originally planned, or I may need to go directly to my new address in beautiful downtown Box Elder South Dakota.

    I have changed the recording on my phone to ask people to not leave messages if calling for Lawless America. I must ask that all Lawless America issues be by email only. I'm just trying to survive, and eliminating voice mail seems to be a survival necessity.

    I will be publishing an article on www.LawlessAmerica.com explaining new policies. Please read it. At the rate I am going now, the movie will not be finished for a year, and I will have maxed out all my credit cards before that. So, I will jot film in a state unless one person from the state volunteers to coordinate. That person will then handle all requests for filming and will ensure that everyone sends everything that we request...or they will not be filmed. I have been spending at least half of my time doing work that should have been done by those being filmed. I just have to cry "uncle."

    I will be insisting that those who want to be in the theatrical release of the movie arrange to get the photography that I need for your backstory. Another significant percentage of my time is being consumed driving around and photographing places that the victims could have handled in half the time. So, those who can't take the time to arrange the photos needed simply will not have a chance to be featured in the movie.

    My litigation and criminal complaints against those who have stalked and threatened me will require that I take some time off filming to work on those issues. I'll let you all know when that will be.

    Happy Father's Day to all the fathers and children, and to all the mothers fortunate enough to be with a great husband (father).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now that is worth a party. ^^^

      Delete
    2. Waiving his dirty underwear as a semi-white flag!

      Delete
    3. Too much to pick apart from above, but this is one good "I'm DONE" indicator.

      Lawless America Stall trip II was all about filming backstories, so why is he complaining about it? He estimated about 86 days to do it. (so he's not actually doing a complete redo of Con-road I). Now he's whining about it, and blaming people for his incompetence? This was his choice to go back and do stuff he should have done the first time. OMG the drama, lies, deceit, blame, anger, tantrums etc. with this guy are endless.

      "Lawless America Movie Road Trip II Report from Bill Windsor - May 6, 2013
      Filming the backstories for interviews previously conducted is taking longer than I expected."

      "Road Trip II began on April 6, 2013 and will last for approximately 86 days."

      Then from the above rant yesterday:

      "I will be insisting that those who want to be in the theatrical release of the movie arrange to get the photography that I need for your backstory. Another significant percentage of my time is being consumed driving around and photographing places that the victims could have handled in half the time. So, those who can't take the time to arrange the photos needed simply will not have a chance to be featured in the movie."

      All this whining about having to take SO much time to take pictures, from a guy who posts thousands of sightseeing pictures of stuff that HE thinks are great. Numerous pictures of flags, barns, freeways, signs, restaurants, the sky, buildings, landscapes, even Superman's crotch...People, it comes down to this. You are just messing up his vacation with your requests. Period.

      Delete
    4. He has all kinds of time to stalk and threaten people, to stop on the side of the road to flip out about his family wanting nothing to do with him (the windy video) and sue Allie because he's butthurt but he freaks on the victims and tells them it's THEIR JOB to make HIS movie??? YEAH that's a GREEEAAAAT MAN!

      Happy UN-Father's Day Billy. I'm sure this is one of the best day's your family has ever had you con artist scum. Thank God they booted you to the curb, they should have done it years ago.

      Delete
    5. Happy Un-Fathers Day Tribute to Bill

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRlAnwk-mYs

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OqwKfgLaeA

      Delete
    6. In his windy video he says he has filmed over 1,500 people who are "all victims" or government corruption. Really? Did he vet them? No. Have many been debunked? Yes. Does he care? No.

      His Youtube channel says there are 1,200-ish videos. Where are the other 300-ish videos? Are they not published because they were debunked by someone other than BW, therefore were removed for fear of them discrediting the ones that *might* be truthful? Who knows.

      And again the attention-whore that is BW, violates the divorce agreement by invoking his family members (by referencing his wife and grandchildren). When will they have enough of this and put a stop to it?

      His oft-reference to "us...at Lawless America" - who is "us"? After all, he also often claims he's doing this all alone, with no help from anyone. Make up your mind, con man.

      As for the wind - it would have helped if he pinned his mic to his left-side color, facing away from the wind. Anyone with a brain would know that, so surely a
      movie producer" would, wouldn't you think?

      Delete
    7. OF government corruption - not "or".

      Delete
    8. All great points. Here is something else to think about. Everyone did a 3 min. video, and one or two longer videos. All his stupid videos are also included in there. So, split the 1200 in half, (saying everyone has just 2) that's 600.

      Now figure how many of those are Bills. Ya, he is LYING about the numbers once again for the sole purpose of defrauding people into thinking this is a larger group than it is.

      Bill is a salesman. He is using Puffery which could be considered fraud if "investors", "t.v", "media" or others buy his b.s. and sign him.

      Delete
  21. In re: to Connie Fiedling

    http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Family-Voice-Magazine-Aka-Connie-Fielding/Cedar-Hills-Utah-84062/Family-Voice-Magazine-Aka-Connie-Fielding-ripoff-non-payment-of-services-performed-Cedar-H-172211

    https://www.facebook.com/events/172545796149612/

    ReplyDelete
  22. Miss Petunia...are you around?? Mary B got herself locked up in jail..

    :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. umm , never mind, I see you already know...how is she??

      Delete
    2. Petunia? Spawn received a message - waves to everyone, she's been busy, waiting for new computer and will be back soon.

      Delete
    3. Mary Bagnaschi was arrested for breach of the peace

      http://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-pardon-mary-bagnaschi

      My bet is, it wasn't so much what she said but maybe how she said it?

      Delete
    4. Hey Oceans, yeah Mary B was arrested at least 3-4 weeks ago now for some kind of public outburst I think aimed at an officer once again. Her bond was set at $5,000 and I'm not sure she has been able to make it out. And yes P knows about it

      Delete
    5. Hiya Ginger *waves*

      Yeah, I read the comments and saw P's comment. Seems like she was arrested between May 28 and May 30..and I agree NBTDT it was probably the volume she used(yelling) in a public agency.

      I check on her status every so often, and was sad to see she was in jail.

      Thanks for the alpaca update...yay for new computers!!

      Delete
    6. Pie Man Zombie HunterJune 15, 2013 at 9:26 PM

      https://www.change.org/petitions/president-obama-pardon-mary-bagnaschi

      Delete
    7. maybe her computer came in cuz Petunia's on twitter and her regular FB.

      Delete
    8. *waving*
      I'm online via mobile. Clubhouse is difficult for me to post via mobile, but easy to read. I sure hope the replacement Mac will arrive! I'd been using the PawPaw's, but he's learning to use it! (Yeah!)
      I luffed this blog post & all of @Attorney's words are perfect!
      I have visitors from afar at home for a few more days, enjoying them immensely~I hope everyone is enjoying their summer & their kiddos are happy being out of school!
      Luff to all!
      ***WAVING***

      Delete
  23. To all our Dads in the clubhouse and Moms pulling double duty:

    Happy Father's Day!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Happy Father's Day to all ! xo

      Delete
    2. Thank you and to you as well.

      ~Jen~

      Delete
  24. I know we've taken issue with LA lemming Nick Marrs, from Cleburne, TX before, but out of boredom & curiosity I took a closer look. At first, I thought Nick might be an OK guy, maybe just a little misdirected out of some kind of pain he's suffered. After all, he's practically a neighbor, lives only 30 minutes down the road and most intriguing, he "likes" Ray Hunt & Buck Brannaman. Hunt was and Brannaman (subject of the documentary "Buck") is a horse whisperer, both were mentors to my mentor. I thought this was a clear indication of Nick's sophistication and higher level of thinking.

    Well, no. Once you start reading Nick's FB page, it becomes obvious that if he's studied any thing at all about Hunt or Brannaman he did not internalize any of the principles. And, it appears Nick does not like women with authority - he's posted some pretty ugly things about Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton. OK, well maybe he doesn't like women Democrats, but he doesn't like George W. Bush either. He thinks Bush was a tool for the Illumanti.

    Aside from the usual conspiracy stuff, Nick has posted stuff from a site called Storm Clouds Gathering. This is a scary place. Bill Windsor and Lawless America might be a moot point, but the SovCit and revolution movement is alive and well. Now I'm nervous that Nick only lives 30 minutes down the road.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jxi6ksgInNo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    http://stormcloudsgathering.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, these people scare me too NBTDT

      Between the conspiracies and the SovCits it's crazy the people Bill the Boob attracts...

      Delete
  25. Pie Man Zombie HunterJune 16, 2013 at 5:37 PM

    old youtube about Bill Windsor, but it is so funny to see it, now

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzOJAEpdvTY

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL!! You know those goofy animal photos that are taken really close up? And their faces are all distorted. That is what he looks like!

      Kinda like these
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBu9nAOlRRE

      Delete
    2. PMZH,

      Thanks so much for the link! It made my day--there's something very interesting about this video, and I intend to reveal it on the next Windsor Unleashed episode (stay tuned).

      Yo Yappy...check your email.

      (Sluggo on laptop)

      Delete
    3. Yeah, I found something interesting in the video too. At about 54 seconds Bill says he is a leading authority on judicial corruption. He posted another campaign video, at 40 seconds he says he is a national expert on judicial corruption.

      Says who? Webster says an expert is an individual of recognized knowledge in a particular topic, typically confirmed by academic standing and publications. Black's Law Dictionary says an expert is: Persons examined as witnesses in a cause, who testify in regard to some professional or technical matter arising in the case, and who are permitted to give their opinions as to such matter on account of their special training, skill, or familiarity with it. An expert is a person who possesses peculiar skill and knowledge upon the subject matter that he is required to give an opinion upon.

      The Free Dictionary explains that an expert may present an opinion in a case provided that the expert is qualified by evidence of his/her expertise, training and special knowledge. I point this out because I have been qualified as an expert in my field. As far as I can tell, the only qualification Bill has received is vexatious litigant.

      Delete
  26. Oh, Look - Bill thinks he's found us:

    ONFIDENTIAL REPORT NAMING MANY OF MY STALKERS

    I want to thank the wonderful folks who have provided information and assistance in my battle against stalkers, harassers, libelers, slanderers, and those who threaten me in various ways, including those with death threats.

    I understand that I am now the recipient of a report that identifies the people with the screen names used on http://joeyisalittlekid.blogspot.com/ I anxiously await the forwarding of my mail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't wait to see if I'm still 2 people or just a figment of Gingersnap's imagination.......

      Delete
    2. You mean he freely admits to asking members of the public to spy on and report on complete strangers? Hello, 1984!

      Delete
    3. lmfao HI BILLY! We've seen your CONFIDENTIAL report buddy - but not going to say HOW we obtained it..... :)

      Have fun, this is going to be H I L A R I O U S

      How about you play with us? Give us a name or just a couple of first and last name initials. I've had such a fantastic day with friends and family... I'd love to round it out with rip roaring belly aching laughter.

      Delete
    4. LMAO Oh NOOOO lemmings, more sidestepping, stalling, and hating to keep him from helping any of you! Hahaha His true passion!

      Distractions from the truth are so easy for these dummies to fall for. They think everything is a conspiracy, so what easier targets then them. Oh, how stupid they are all going to feel when this is over and done, and they figure out he conned them.

      Delete
    5. Well, the good news might be that Ken's A/C business might pick up. Summer is here and there might be lots of new customers......you know, name recognition.......

      Delete
    6. Bad news might be that Billy finally figures out Ninja and NBTDT really are one person.....and both are figments of Gingersnap's imagination.....

      Delete
    7. LMAO!! Oh crap! :-(
      (Good one)

      Delete
    8. SHUSH NBTDT. You're giving them too many secrets.

      Delete
  27. How is it that you have seen a report he shared when he hasn't yet received it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A copy was given but cannot say how. Why would you think Windsor would give a copy to us?

      Delete
    2. Someone said you got a copy of it because he shared it. How could that have happened if he doesn't have it yet?

      Delete
    3. Nope, you're reading it wrong. I didn't say because HE shared it. I said we've SEEN his confidential report. Lost in translation I'm assuming

      What part of "but not going to say how we've obtained it" confuses you?

      Not sure why this concerns you but I find the info hilarious. I guess we'll let Billy do a new lawless.com article soon :)

      Delete
    4. June 15, 10:14 pm "and let's not forget Billy shared that secret memo."

      Delete
    5. That was in another conversation about the last secret and confidential list he had. This is a new one, which is such a crazy coincidence he has a new one as soon as we talk about the last one, isn't it? Wow, what a cute little coinkidink.

      Delete
    6. That 10:14 comment wasn't me. That was a different thing.

      Delete
    7. It's a warped kind of sick to see the sheer lengths you'll stoop, JUST to get in what you ASSume is the last 'word'. Or for you? a sneaky, two or three days later's shitsling.
      Usually, I make it a point to skip over anything that you post. I make an exception & go back to read your blatherings when @Attorney comments/responds to you though! @Attorney has such a way with zapping your discombobulated 'legalese'! I delightfully relish @Attorney's every keystroke:)
      I did finally venture over to your little *blog*. You got issues that 5 rolls of duct tape can't fix! WOWzers! You're over here. You're over on LawlessAmerica's Facebook & .com site. You very obviously have spent many hours building your *blog*. And, you've mentioned in the past that you supposedly work for a living. So? With all your creeping activities (referred to by you as 'research') + your long commentaries on Ginger's blog + your even longer rebuttals to anyone, especially @Attorney here on Ginger's blog + your endless lists & categorizing on your *blog* = you simply don't have time for the real stuff life is made of, huh? You just sit in front of a computer, pilfering thru the online information about activities of others? You're copying & pasting everything from here, editorializing after that & then, compiling & cross referencing it all in the 'SusanSystem'? You even comment on your own posts! That's just bizarre.
      NO ONE would've EVER visited your *blog* IF you had not mentioned it here, on Ginger's blog in the comment threads! & even then? Those *blog* visits, from Ginger's readers? were just to really see for ourselves that you are indeed over there, just yacking it up! With yourself. (like a reported BigFoot or Elvis sighting! we had to see it to believe it) & BAM! YEP, YOU ARE! yack yack yack yacking away! >inset a face palm, here<
      After that jaunt over to your *blog*? There is NO longer any doubt for me, why you're the bitter, hateful, snotty, unlikeable, undesirable troll you've been labeled!
      What's with all that JOIN & REGISTER on your *blog*? or use another site, such as FaceBook's or Twitter's log in to access your *blog*? What is THAT ? More of the SusanSystem of name taking? Labeling? Cross referencing? That is enough to run off even accidental visitors! What was your purpose with your *blog*? Or did it have one? Is is like knitting or jogging for you? A solitary hobby? It's not a user friendly kinda place for sure.
      It just so sucks to be you. No blog, website, Facebook page or their commenters want your input & when you impose it anyway? You get OWNED! And, OH! what a spectacular way in which @Attorney did! Your own *blog* (cough, snicker, giggle) is just an obscure, online journal of your obsessions with Windsor, Ginger's blog & the commenters here.
      You do know that there are apps for journaling & list making, right? I hope that helps.

      Delete
  28. Praying for Bill? WTF For? What does this woman think he is going to do for Connie? He can't do a damn thing. This is what really irks me about these dumbasses. Like a stupid youtube video, or an article on his feeble .com site will change anything. (if the .com site is up or not doesn't matter) OMG WAKE UP!

    "Lisa Snow Hagner THANK YOU FOR SCHEDULING IN CONNIE FIELDING! She has a hearing this week. The Criminals are trying to get her locked up for 6 months - for being an Informant. WE ARE ALL PRAYING FOR YOU!"

    "Lisa Snow Hagner THANK YOU FOR SCHEDULING IN CONNIE FIELDING. It won't be a waste of time - she has so much to offer - she has helped so many women and children. Please come before her court hearing Friday."

    "Lisa Snow Hagner I AM SO THANKFUL TO HEAR YOU ARE GOING TO DO A STORY ON CONNIE FIELDING - from Midway, UT - currently at McKay Dee Hosp! You will be amazed with her story! THANK YOU!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya, that Connie chick used to tell me she was double spy government informant, turning it against the government. I kept thinking, suuure, cuz government informants go around telling random FB friends they are , er, informants. DOH!

      Delete
    2. LOL Wow. Ya, I'm thinking there is a good reason she's being observed.
      (I also read a minute order to a hearing, where she kept the tax records from her ex husband, causing him some trouble. Kind of discredits her being such an honest, upstanding, wonderful person a bit)

      Delete
    3. While you pray for him, he preys on you.

      Delete
  29. oceans is a figment too...June 17, 2013 at 3:00 PM

    uh, I see a banning about to happen...

    Alloryn Samson Bill unfortunately your wrong this community is a public forum to which you have ability to moderate it. Its not illegal or considered stalking to read a facebook page with comments which are posted in public. If it were that way weve lost freedom to browse the internet and have comment elsewhere. Do you not understand this concept bill as much as a love you for what your doing your understandings are sometimes off.

    ReplyDelete
  30. ROFLMAO-- O M GEEEE

    the latest from the land of pie...
    Ginger Snap is a big-time criminal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know..I hit the bigtime now. Don't worry, I won't forget all you guys now that I'm at the top

      Delete
    2. How can you forget us, we are in your head ;)

      Delete
  31. I <3 you Gingersnap, your comments to Billy the Boob just made my day!! People, you need to read LA FB now....It's awesome!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ginger Snap So where should I turn myself in at? I guess the jig is up, Billy got me. I should be off work at the club later this afternoon

      Lawless America Ginger Snap, cease and desist. This is cyberstalking, harassment, and criminal.

      Ginger Snap you want me to cease AND desist? What about abate? Have you learned any new words? Hey, you are the one talking about me, I'm just trying to find out how I turn myself in.

      Lawless America Your continued harassment is just that and cyberstalking. I simply made a comment on MY page, where you are not invited, about a person who uses the alias "Ginger Snap." I did not send it to you, did not post it on your page, did not email it, nothing. But you, if you are the ginger Snap, are a cyberstalker, harasser, libeler, slanderer, and terrorist. Cease and desist. All posts are copied for the police and for use in court.

      Ginger Snap Do you send out formal invitations to everyone to post on your public facebook page? I think not, so I'm just as invited as anyone else. You are more than free to email me or post on my blog, I wont even tell you to cease and desist or even abate. I bet you are wearing out those law enforcement trash cans with your constant complaining and whining. I thought I was supposed to be in jail like 4 months ago, why am I still here?

      Alan Perri Industryadviser Add her to your block list and neither of you can see each other anywhere

      Lawless America Alan, i like the evidence.

      Lawless America my Facebook page is not public. I ask people to leave. When they don't, cyberstalk, and harass, they are committing crimes. Ginger Snap is a big-time criminal. I hope I now know who "it" is.

      Ginger Snap here is a little hint as to why I'm still free, and not in jail, while you are still wandering around aimlessly in the desert....you can't make up your own rules. This is still America, not Lawless America and until that point you can't make up the truth. You can call me a criminal 5 billion times, it won't make it any more true than if you never made the accusation in the first place. The truth is the truth, not what you say it is.

      Alan Perri Industryadviser if you get notifications to your email a ip address may show up on her

      Chris Emeral "You are more than free to email me or post on my blog, I wont even tell you to cease and desist or even abate." Gingersnap, king of the Joey blog, would have people believe he does not censor posts. In fact he bans anyone that does not agree with the party line of "all hate all the time". He also deletes any posts that might lead people to think for themselves. If you don't drink the Kool Aide there, you will be censored. And Gingersnap makes up his own TRUTH daily on that blog, I don't know why he acts as if he doesn't.

      Ginger Snap me too, I'm diligently still counting as well, but its been a little over 300,000 hours now and I'm still alive and well...I'm starting to think that Bill is, now brace yourself, just full of hot air. You know, all bark and no bite. All hat and no cattle...so on.

      '

      Delete