Courtroom Video REVEALS ABUSIVE CONDUCT of WV JUDGE WATKINS Reminiscent of the RANT of JUDGE FACEMIRE During the Travesty of Justice Trial

By Rina McCoy – Crooked County Crooks Editor for the Concerned Citizens Free Press/Editor Edison – CalPatty Press Editor

Judge Richard A Facemire denied showing a great deal of bias and calling the defendant in the longest running court case in Gilmer County history, DESPICABLE, although, Facemire on the tape clearly mispronounces the word while  screaming at the defendant. Facemire clearly mispronounces the word as DIS PIC A BLE when it is clearly DES instead of DIS but what can you expect from a judge from the 14th district Circuit Court that gets to the most hidden hollows of Webster Springs , Braxton County, Gilmer County and Clay County.

Judge Facemire (shown above in this 3 FACES of EVIL photo) committed an act of blatant misconduct during the Travesty of Justice case, by yelling and screaming and calling the defendant names FOR NO REASON – just exactly like Judge Watkins clearly demonstrates in the video below, and was witnessed by a full courtroom, but when John Oshoway a local attorney was asked about it the very next day, his answer was that he doesn’t have a very good memory and didn’t remember what the judge said. Facemire denied the outburst in a 14 page letter to the JIC that they will not release, because the entire matter was redacted from the court record against West Virginia rules of the court. An effort is being made by political reform advocates to go after individuals in official capacities that cover for these corrupt and disgusting judges like Facemire and Watkins.

Heck, some people are still running illegal whiskey stills in those necks of the woods. Moonshine white lightning, mountain dew, hooch, is a very high proof, often 190 proof (95% alcohol) distilled spirit that is sometimes used to RAPE the female students at Glenville State College — as was evidenced by the latest Goodwin Hall Rape in which JAYDY LAYNE a student at GSC mixed a lethal concoction of booze that flat-lined the victim of the rape in the ambulance on the way to the hospital with a 2.4 alcohol blood count, but rapes, are not against the law in Gilmer County, or so it appears, since nobody has ever been convicted of any of the countless rapes at Glenville State. Drugs and driving under the influence are OK too, if you have the right last name.

JUDGE FACEMIRE was abusive many times during the “Travesty of Justice” court case that was in WV Supreme Court for two years. FACEMIRE lied to the Judicial Investigation Commission in a 14 page letter that the JIC won’t release, although there have been at least FIVE requests for the document.

Rev. Arthur D. Hage, 63, has posted the video below as part of his complaint to the state Judicial Investigation Commission about Putnam County Circuit Court Family Law Judge William M. “Chip” Watkins III. It shows Watkins, 58, going ballistic in a divorce case where he screams at Hage, including to tell him to “Shut up” and accusing him of telling a “damn lie.”

Hage was raising a termite issue in the marital home that the minister felt had to be addressed before being sold to anyone. The judge appears out of control at points, screaming “I didn’t tell you to talk. … Are you deaf?” and “Shut up! I didn’t ask you to speak.”

Watkins accuses Hage of being behind a news website’s article about Watkins and his wife being delinquent on paying their homeowner’s association dues.

Judge Watkins shown in this photo should have his ticket pulled for his actions in the courtroom that you can witness for yourself by viewing the below video!

It starts out with Watkins saying calmly “Mr. Hage, if you say one word out of turn, you’re going to jail. Do you understand me?” That was a bad sign since I fail to see any basis for such a threat. Hage nonetheless answers “Yes.”

Watkins then accuses Hage of speaking with a reporter after the prior hearing and his wife Lillian’s lawyer asked for an order of contempt for Hage mentioning his wife’s mental health problems in violation of a court order.

That is when Hage tried to speak and touched off a judicial eruption. Watkins screams “Because of you, my wife is there alone, and my house has been vandalized four times. You realize that, of course, as I’m sure you’re probably in on it and laughing about it.” The judge continues to say “You, you disgusting piece of …” and “I swear to you. You’re responsible. I’m holding you personally responsible for anything that happens to my house.”

In what appears to be the world’s most obvious point, Watkins states “I promise you that if I see so much as anyone blanketing my home, my wife, my family, you and me are going to have a problem. …”

Notably, Watkins appears to start to recuse himself after saying “Well, buddy, it’s personal. It’s personal, and I can promise you, you will not hear the end of it from me.” It would seem recusal at that point is inevitable. However, Watkins stops himself and again starts to beat up on the pastor, including some remarkable threats: “Please understand that. I will resign this bench and I will personally see to it that you never see a free day in your life. Do you understand? You’re going to jail, I swear to God.”

Here is the most amazing thing, Watkins then proceeds to conduct the hearing and refuses to recuse himself!!

The ethics charge has obvious merit given the judge’s personal interest and anger — not to mention his loss of composure and demeanor.

Regardless of the merits of the allegations, Watkins was no longer a disinterested or neutral party, but in West Virginia, with the Snake Oil salesman that make up the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, and the JIC, really what chance of punishment is there for this out of line judge?

Watkins was also accused of threatening two local reporters.

Judge Watkins behavior is almost identical to the behavior of Judge Richard A Facemire in the Circuit Court of Gilmer County, but the matter was covered up, by local officials and the JIC made no investigation of the facts.

One thing for sure is everyone reading this article and viewing this video below better hope they don’t ever wind up in ANY West Virginia Court, for they will experience hell fire itself and illegal actions condoned by the highest ranks of the West Virginia Government and the West Virginia Supreme Court!

6 comments

  1. The only thing missing from this outrageous action is TARA KENNEDY telling the judge this man has two children out of wedlock with an underage teenage girl, which of course would be a complete lie, and it would be the same complete lie she told in court during the Travesty of Justice case because I was there and heard it for myself.

  2. Putnam man accuses family law judge, staff of mischief
    2/3/2012 7:50 AM By Lawrence Smith -Putnam Bureau

    WINFIELD – A Putnam family law judge and his staff are accused of legally taking more than $10,000 from a Scott Depot man to pay for his alleged child support arrearage.

    William H. “Chip” Watkins is named as a co-defendant in a writ of prohibition filed by Terry K. Hamm. In his writ filed Jan. 17 in Putnam Circuit Court, Hamm alleges Watkins overstepped his bounds when he, first, ordered him detained after showing up late for a hearing, then ordering the $11,000 Hamm’s father posted as bond forfeited without a hearing.

    According to his writ, Hamm was scheduled to appear before Watkins on Nov. 17 to answer a show-cause petition filed the month earlier by the state Department of Health and Human Services’ Bureau for Child Support Enforcement. In its petition, BCSE alleged Hamm was in arrears $10,544.62 to Bobbie Lee Braley, the mother of his son.

    Court records show Hamm on Sept. 21, 2002, was ordered to pay Braley $188 to support his son. In his response to BCSE’s petition, Hamm cited his two part-time jobs paying minimum wage as his inability to pay.

    Also, Hamm in his Nov. 14 answer said he “was unaware that he could’ve sought modification of his child support obligation from the Court at that time because of erroneous information provided to him by DHHR.” Furthermore, Hamm asked that Watkins order BCSE to recalculate the amount to pay Braley based on his current financial situation.

    Hamm, who graduated 2009 from West Virginia University with a bachelor of science in business administration, was interning at Hurricane attorney Joe Reeder’s office while going back to school to obtain an associate’s degree in paralegal studies from Kanawha Valley Community and Technical College. Hamm mistakeningly informed Reeder the hearing was set for 4 p.m. on Nov. 17 when it was actually scheduled for 11 a.m.

    According to the writ, sometime around noon Lori Mitchell, Watkins’ case coordinator, called Reeder’s office informing him Hamm missed his hearing, and that if he didn’t appear in court by 3 p.m. that day, a capias would be issued for his arrest. About 1:30 p.m. both Hamm and Reeder appeared at “the window in family court and spoke with the staff concerning the scheduling mistake.”

    Fifteen minutes later, Watkins’ bailiff appeared with an order sending him to jail. Since Diana Johnson, BSCE’s attorney, was still in the courtroom when they arrived, Reeder asked that Watkins still hold the hearing on the show-cause petition.

    After a few moments, Mitchell said that “there was nothing that could be done and that [Hamm] would be taken into custody. When Reeder again asked for a hearing, “Ms. Mitchell appeared from behind the door and angrily stated that [Hamm] and [Reeder] would not be seeing the Judge and scolded [Reeder] to ‘get out now.'”

    In his writ, Hamm says following Mitchell’s “unprofessional outburst, which was witnessed by numerous litigants in the reception area” both he and Reeder “left peaceably with the bailiff.”

    At a time not specified, Hamm’s father, Karl, arrived at the courthouse, and posted $11,000 to secure his release. Though detained, Hamm says in his writ he was never incarcerated.

    According to the writ, Watkins never rescheduled a hearing on BCSE’s show-cause petition. Instead, without providing either he or Reeder any prior notice, Hamm says Watkins on Jan. 3 ordered the $11,000 forfeited to BSCE to pay for the arrearage.

    By doing so, Hamm says in his writ Watkins not only violated his right to due process, but also engaged in an unlawful taking of property. Though he “readily admits and accepts responsibility for his failure to timely appear” for the Nov. 17 hearing, Hamm says Watkins erred in not rescheduling a hearing which was the purpose of Hamm’s father posting the $11,000 bond.

    “Upon the issuance of the capias and jail commitment order,” Hamm says in his writ, “Respondent Watkins made no determination that [Hamm] had any ability to comply with his prior support orders or that he willfully did not pay support in contemptuous disregard of the Court.”

    “In fact,” Hamm added, “Respondent Watkins has made no specific finding that [Hamm] was even in contempt of court for non-compliance with his support obligations.”

    Putnam Circuit Judge Phillip M. Stowers, who has been assigned the case, has set Thursday, Feb. 24 for a hearing on Hamm’s writ of prohibition. Braley, DHHR and BCSE are named as co-defendants.

    Putnam Circuit Court case number 12-C-10

  3. Facing contempt charges, Putnam family judge rules on two-year old motions
    7/12/2012 7:22 AM By Lawrence Smith -Putnam Bureau


    CHARLESTON
    Already facing possible disciplinary action for his lack of professionalism in a Hurricane pastor’s divorce, a Putnam County family law judge has complied with the state Supreme Court’s order that he issue a ruling on motions that have been pending in another divorce for nearly two years.

    The Court on July 5 ordered Judge William M. “Chip” Watkins III to make rulings on motions in the divorce of John J. and Nancy Black by July 10 or be held in contempt. The Court’s ultimatum, issued in the form of a memorandum opinion, came in response to a writ of mandamus John Black filed last month after Watkins not once, but twice ignored orders by Putnam County’s two circuit judges to render a decision.

    Memorandum opinions are issued by the Court in cases that would not be significantly aided by oral arguments, and present no new or significant questions of law.

    Up and down the judicial ladder

    Black’s first writ of mandamus was filed in February 2011. In it, he asked Judge O.C. “Hobby” Spaulding to order Watkins to finalize equitable distribution of property between he and Nancy.

    According to court records, Watkins granted the Blacks’ divorce petition on Nov. 14, 2008. However, along with the sale of their home, John alleged Watkins had yet to make a determination on a qualified domestic relations order on their pensions that was presented to him on July 9, 2010.

    Records show, Spaulding on Feb. 7, 2011, granted Black’s writ, and ordered Watkins to hold a hearing on the final distribution of property within 30 days. For reasons not immediately clear, the hearing was not held until June 1.

    When Watkins failed to make a ruling by Oct. 24, Black filed his second writ of mandamus. Through his attorney, Mark Kelley, Black said “the family court’s delay of nearly five months in rendering a decision is unreasonable particularly given the length of time involved since the petition was originally filed, and puts [Black] in the position of having to expend, for a second time, unnecessary legal fees to force [Watkins] to perform his required duty.”

    Judge Phillip M. Stowers on Dec. 20 agreed saying Black “is entitled to have an order entered from the June 1, 2011 hearing.” In granting Black’s second writ of mandamus, Stowers ordered Watkins to issue a final decision on the Black’s property by Feb. 20.

    When Watkins filed to abide by Stowers’ order, Black filed a writ of mandamus with the Court on June 12. Upon receiving it, the Court gave Watkins until June 28 to respond.

    When he failed to respond, the Court had one of its clerks contact Watkins’ case coordinator, Lori Mitchell, the morning of July 5 who “confirmed Judge Watkins has still failed to issue a decision as no order has been entered.” In its decision, the Court said Watkins’ dawdling is unacceptable.

    “Respondent [Watkins] has shown no just cause for his failure to comply with orders of the court,” the Court said. “In fact, he has failed to provide any response. It is abundantly clear that the petitioner [Black] is entitled to the relief requested in this matter.”

    Also, the Court said Watkins’ inaction has not only harmed Black, but also the judiciary. Not only did his foot-dragging violate Article III, Section 17 of the state Constitution that states ” ‘justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay,’ ” but also various provision of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and West Virginia Trial Court Rules that ” ‘[a] judge shall dispose of all judicial matters promptly, efficiently, and fairly’ ” and “effectuate expeditious movement and timely disposition of all cases assigned to them.”

    Specifically, the Court said Watkins’ inaction clearly violated Trial Court Rule 16.06 that directs family law judges to enter orders on “‘post-hearing motions within one month of submission.'”
    Court Clerk Rory L. Perry II confirmed Watkins issued a ruling on the motions the next day, and they were to the Court’s satisfaction.

    Complaints pending

    The Court’s decision came just over a week after a video was made public showing Watkins unleashing a tirade on Rev. Arthur D. Hage during a May 23 hearing involving division of marital assets with his estranged wife, Lillian. The video, which has since made national news, shows Watkins falsely accusing Hage of being behind an article that appeared on a Putnam County news website the day before about Watkins last Fall failing to be “in good standing” with his homeowner’s association dues.

    At one point, Watkins accuses Hage of being responsible for acts of vandalism that occurred to his home on Raintree Drive in the Brierwood subdivision in Teays Valley following publication of the article. Should he discover Hage was behind it, Watkins assured him “I will resign this bench and I will personally see to it that you never see a free day in your life.”

    One of Hage’s parishioners, Paul Bentley, who accompanied him to the hearing, also filed an ethics complaint against Watkins for ordering him to leave the Putnam County Judicial Building for no apparent reason. The video not only shows Watkins ordering his bailiff to throw Bentley out, but also brought into the courtroom “[i]f he smiles” so as “to answer what’s so damn funny.”

    Because Nancy Black is the executive secretary for the Judicial Investigation Commission, the arm of the Court that investigates judicial misconduct, Hage’s and Bentley’s complaints have been referred to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for investigation.

    West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case number 12-0720

  4. 3 responses to Courtroom Video REVEALS ABUSIVE CONDUCT of WV JUDGE WATKINS Reminiscent of the RANT of JUDGE FACEMIRE During the Travesty of Justice Trial

    Subscribe to comments with RSS.

    The only thing missing from this outrageous action is TARA KENNEDY telling the judge this man has two children out of wedlock with an underage teenage girl, which of course would be a complete lie, and it would be the same complete lie she told in court during the Travesty of Justice case because I was there and heard it for myself.
    Reply
    Crooked County Crooks
    July 6, 2012 at 3:10 pm

    Putnam man accuses family law judge, staff of mischief
    2/3/2012 7:50 AM By Lawrence Smith -Putnam Bureau

    WINFIELD – A Putnam family law judge and his staff are accused of legally taking more than $10,000 from a Scott Depot man to pay for his alleged child support arrearage.

    William H. “Chip” Watkins is named as a co-defendant in a writ of prohibition filed by Terry K. Hamm. In his writ filed Jan. 17 in Putnam Circuit Court, Hamm alleges Watkins overstepped his bounds when he, first, ordered him detained after showing up late for a hearing, then ordering the $11,000 Hamm’s father posted as bond forfeited without a hearing.

    According to his writ, Hamm was scheduled to appear before Watkins on Nov. 17 to answer a show-cause petition filed the month earlier by the state Department of Health and Human Services’ Bureau for Child Support Enforcement. In its petition, BCSE alleged Hamm was in arrears $10,544.62 to Bobbie Lee Braley, the mother of his son.

    Court records show Hamm on Sept. 21, 2002, was ordered to pay Braley $188 to support his son. In his response to BCSE’s petition, Hamm cited his two part-time jobs paying minimum wage as his inability to pay.

    Also, Hamm in his Nov. 14 answer said he “was unaware that he could’ve sought modification of his child support obligation from the Court at that time because of erroneous information provided to him by DHHR.” Furthermore, Hamm asked that Watkins order BCSE to recalculate the amount to pay Braley based on his current financial situation.

    Hamm, who graduated 2009 from West Virginia University with a bachelor of science in business administration, was interning at Hurricane attorney Joe Reeder’s office while going back to school to obtain an associate’s degree in paralegal studies from Kanawha Valley Community and Technical College. Hamm mistakeningly informed Reeder the hearing was set for 4 p.m. on Nov. 17 when it was actually scheduled for 11 a.m.

    According to the writ, sometime around noon Lori Mitchell, Watkins’ case coordinator, called Reeder’s office informing him Hamm missed his hearing, and that if he didn’t appear in court by 3 p.m. that day, a capias would be issued for his arrest. About 1:30 p.m. both Hamm and Reeder appeared at “the window in family court and spoke with the staff concerning the scheduling mistake.”

    Fifteen minutes later, Watkins’ bailiff appeared with an order sending him to jail. Since Diana Johnson, BSCE’s attorney, was still in the courtroom when they arrived, Reeder asked that Watkins still hold the hearing on the show-cause petition.

    After a few moments, Mitchell said that “there was nothing that could be done and that [Hamm] would be taken into custody. When Reeder again asked for a hearing, “Ms. Mitchell appeared from behind the door and angrily stated that [Hamm] and [Reeder] would not be seeing the Judge and scolded [Reeder] to ‘get out now.’”

    In his writ, Hamm says following Mitchell’s “unprofessional outburst, which was witnessed by numerous litigants in the reception area” both he and Reeder “left peaceably with the bailiff.”

    At a time not specified, Hamm’s father, Karl, arrived at the courthouse, and posted $11,000 to secure his release. Though detained, Hamm says in his writ he was never incarcerated.

    According to the writ, Watkins never rescheduled a hearing on BCSE’s show-cause petition. Instead, without providing either he or Reeder any prior notice, Hamm says Watkins on Jan. 3 ordered the $11,000 forfeited to BSCE to pay for the arrearage.

    By doing so, Hamm says in his writ Watkins not only violated his right to due process, but also engaged in an unlawful taking of property. Though he “readily admits and accepts responsibility for his failure to timely appear” for the Nov. 17 hearing, Hamm says Watkins erred in not rescheduling a hearing which was the purpose of Hamm’s father posting the $11,000 bond.

    “Upon the issuance of the capias and jail commitment order,” Hamm says in his writ, “Respondent Watkins made no determination that [Hamm] had any ability to comply with his prior support orders or that he willfully did not pay support in contemptuous disregard of the Court.”

    “In fact,” Hamm added, “Respondent Watkins has made no specific finding that [Hamm] was even in contempt of court for non-compliance with his support obligations.”

    Putnam Circuit Judge Phillip M. Stowers, who has been assigned the case, has set Thursday, Feb. 24 for a hearing on Hamm’s writ of prohibition. Braley, DHHR and BCSE are named as co-defendants.

    Putnam Circuit Court case number 12-C-10
    Reply
    Council of Concerned Citizens – Judge Watkins is as CROOKED as they come just like JUDGE FACEMIRE!!
    July 6, 2012 at 3:57 pm

    Facing contempt charges, Putnam family judge rules on two-year old motions
    7/12/2012 7:22 AM By Lawrence Smith -Putnam Bureau

    CHARLESTON – Already facing possible disciplinary action for his lack of professionalism in a Hurricane pastor’s divorce, a Putnam County family law judge has complied with the state Supreme Court’s order that he issue a ruling on motions that have been pending in another divorce for nearly two years.

    The Court on July 5 ordered Judge William M. “Chip” Watkins III to make rulings on motions in the divorce of John J. and Nancy Black by July 10 or be held in contempt. The Court’s ultimatum, issued in the form of a memorandum opinion, came in response to a writ of mandamus John Black filed last month after Watkins not once, but twice ignored orders by Putnam County’s two circuit judges to render a decision.

    Memorandum opinions are issued by the Court in cases that would not be significantly aided by oral arguments, and present no new or significant questions of law.

    Up and down the judicial ladder

    Black’s first writ of mandamus was filed in February 2011. In it, he asked Judge O.C. “Hobby” Spaulding to order Watkins to finalize equitable distribution of property between he and Nancy.

    According to court records, Watkins granted the Blacks’ divorce petition on Nov. 14, 2008. However, along with the sale of their home, John alleged Watkins had yet to make a determination on a qualified domestic relations order on their pensions that was presented to him on July 9, 2010.

    Records show, Spaulding on Feb. 7, 2011, granted Black’s writ, and ordered Watkins to hold a hearing on the final distribution of property within 30 days. For reasons not immediately clear, the hearing was not held until June 1.

    When Watkins failed to make a ruling by Oct. 24, Black filed his second writ of mandamus. Through his attorney, Mark Kelley, Black said “the family court’s delay of nearly five months in rendering a decision is unreasonable particularly given the length of time involved since the petition was originally filed, and puts [Black] in the position of having to expend, for a second time, unnecessary legal fees to force [Watkins] to perform his required duty.”

    Judge Phillip M. Stowers on Dec. 20 agreed saying Black “is entitled to have an order entered from the June 1, 2011 hearing.” In granting Black’s second writ of mandamus, Stowers ordered Watkins to issue a final decision on the Black’s property by Feb. 20.

    When Watkins filed to abide by Stowers’ order, Black filed a writ of mandamus with the Court on June 12. Upon receiving it, the Court gave Watkins until June 28 to respond.

    When he failed to respond, the Court had one of its clerks contact Watkins’ case coordinator, Lori Mitchell, the morning of July 5 who “confirmed Judge Watkins has still failed to issue a decision as no order has been entered.” In its decision, the Court said Watkins’ dawdling is unacceptable.

    “Respondent [Watkins] has shown no just cause for his failure to comply with orders of the court,” the Court said. “In fact, he has failed to provide any response. It is abundantly clear that the petitioner [Black] is entitled to the relief requested in this matter.”

    Also, the Court said Watkins’ inaction has not only harmed Black, but also the judiciary. Not only did his foot-dragging violate Article III, Section 17 of the state Constitution that states ” ‘justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay,’ ” but also various provision of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and West Virginia Trial Court Rules that ” ‘[a] judge shall dispose of all judicial matters promptly, efficiently, and fairly’ ” and “effectuate expeditious movement and timely disposition of all cases assigned to them.”

    Specifically, the Court said Watkins’ inaction clearly violated Trial Court Rule 16.06 that directs family law judges to enter orders on “‘post-hearing motions within one month of submission.’”
    Court Clerk Rory L. Perry II confirmed Watkins issued a ruling on the motions the next day, and they were to the Court’s satisfaction.

    Complaints pending

    The Court’s decision came just over a week after a video was made public showing Watkins unleashing a tirade on Rev. Arthur D. Hage during a May 23 hearing involving division of marital assets with his estranged wife, Lillian. The video, which has since made national news, shows Watkins falsely accusing Hage of being behind an article that appeared on a Putnam County news website the day before about Watkins last Fall failing to be “in good standing” with his homeowner’s association dues.

    At one point, Watkins accuses Hage of being responsible for acts of vandalism that occurred to his home on Raintree Drive in the Brierwood subdivision in Teays Valley following publication of the article. Should he discover Hage was behind it, Watkins assured him “I will resign this bench and I will personally see to it that you never see a free day in your life.”

    One of Hage’s parishioners, Paul Bentley, who accompanied him to the hearing, also filed an ethics complaint against Watkins for ordering him to leave the Putnam County Judicial Building for no apparent reason. The video not only shows Watkins ordering his bailiff to throw Bentley out, but also brought into the courtroom “[i]f he smiles” so as “to answer what’s so damn funny.”

    Because Nancy Black is the executive secretary for the Judicial Investigation Commission, the arm of the Court that investigates judicial misconduct, Hage’s and Bentley’s complaints have been referred to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for investigation.

    West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals case number 12-0720
    Reply
    Concerned Citizens Free Press
    July 13, 2012 at 8:43 am

    Editors note: Interesting comment, by copy and paste, but a little heads up, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel is a SHAM under the leadership of Rachael Cippoletti. A complete utter dishonest sham, so no big hopes for any punishment there. Her and Tarr should both be removed from their jobs.

  5. This Judge needs removed from the bench he apparently is a disgrace to his political allies and is totally paranoid if not deranged.

    Editors note: One of our SS leaders, recently had a phone conference with Teri Tarr, Chief Counsel of the JIC while a reporter was just outside her door, listening, and she was given so many facts involving misconduct,and pushed so far against the ropes that day, that it was predicted she would leave the office for the day by 1pm, but she was gone by 11:17am since we had someone on the inside that day. We are on this one solid.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s