Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [infoguys-list] Not a good thing - SUE

Expand Messages
  • greenwood152@aol.com
    Bill... I totally agree that was a ridiculous statement. I ve never read anything like that by Napolitano. That aside, the issue remains serious.? 1st Choice
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Bill...

      I totally agree that was a ridiculous statement. I've never read anything like that by Napolitano. That aside, the issue remains serious.?


      1st Choice Investigations, Inc.
      Jeff Greenwood
      P.O. Box 895328
      Leesburg, FL 32895
      954-802-0626
      greenwood152@...
      FL Agency # A-2600445
      "Discrete, Thorough, and Cost Effective"


      -----Original Message-----
      From: oracleintl@...
      To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 8:18 am
      Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Not a good thing - SUE






      Nonsense.

      If it was Judge Napolitano actually wrote that the distinction between
      extortion and blackmail is that extortion is a threat to do something that would
      otherwise be a lawful act, that was a completely ridiculous thing to say, and
      I defy you to find one single source anywhere that says anything like that.

      Defend whomever you happen to like, but stoopid commentaries are stoopid
      commentaries, and wrong is wrong, no matter who writes it.

      Invite him to join us and debate the point if you like. I seem to remember
      a female wannabe investigator who did that once, and as I recall that clown
      called himself a "Judge" too -- as I recall, it didn't work out so well for
      him.

      Bill E. Branscum, Investigator
      Irascible Curmudgeon,
      Contumelious Cynic,
      Inveterate Skeptic &
      Incorrigible Purveyor of Pointed Prose

      Oracle International
      Naples, FL 34101
      (239) 304-1639 V
      (239) 304-1640 F
      (239) 641-6782 C
      _www.FraudsAndScams.com_ (http://www.FraudsAndScams.com)

      In a message dated 4/3/2009 12:01:20 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      suesarkis@... writes:

      In a message dated 4/2/2009 6:51:18 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

      That wasn't my comment -- that was written by a bonehead.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      I have been following the works, writings, teachings, etc. of Judge
      Napolitano for about 20 years. I find his logic and thinking quite
      extraordinaire in
      that he has the ability to "think outside the box" while thinking "within
      the confines of the law". I believe we should have more like him. He is a
      graduate of both Princeton and Notre Dame Law School. He's been a professor
      at
      Seton Hall for about a dozen years or so.
      And, it is my belief that Ron Paul was going to choose him as his running
      mate had he stayed in.

      No, I strongly disagree in that he is not a bonehead. You don't have to
      agree with him, but again, NOPE, he is not a bonehead.

      I have read all three of his books and anxiously await his next one.

      1) Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks its Own
      Laws whereby he criticizes the American justice system; 2) The Constitution
      in Exile: How the Federal Government Has Seized Power by Rewriting the
      Supreme
      Law of the Land which speaks for itself; and, 3) A Nation of Sheep. I would
      rather he had titled that one A Nation of Lemmings but, oh well, he didn't
      ask me.

      Sue

      ************************<WBR>**Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make d
      less. (_http://food.http://food.<WBhttp://food.http://food.<WBRhttp_
      (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001) )

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
      less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • suesarkis@aol.com
      In a message dated 4/3/2009 5:19:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, oracleintl@aol.com writes: actually wrote that the distinction between extortion and blackmail
      Message 2 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        In a message dated 4/3/2009 5:19:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
        oracleintl@... writes:

        actually wrote that the distinction between extortion and blackmail is that
        extortion is a threat to do something that would otherwise be a lawful act,
        that was a completely ridiculous thing to say, and I defy you to find one
        single source anywhere that says anything like that.



        Bill -

        I do see a difference between 18 USC §§ 872 and 873 and I truly can see
        where he was coming from. Who knows, maybe my mind is just a stupid as his
        honor. One could only hope !!!

        Doesn't this support what he said regarding the matter that he was
        discussing?

        18 USC §872
        §872. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States
        Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any
        department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to act as
        such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an act
        of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
        three years, or both; but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not exceed
        $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one
        year, or both.

        18 USC §873
        §873. Blackmail
        Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not
        informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or receives
        any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or
        imprisoned not more than one year, or both.




        Sincerely yours,
        Sue
        ________________________
        Sue Sarkis
        Sarkis Detective Agency

        (est. 1976)
        PI 6564
        _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

        1346 Ethel Street
        Glendale, CA 91207-1826
        818-242-2505
        818-246-3001 FAX

        "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

        If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
        a military veteran
        **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
        less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Lists
        I must confess I have not read the entire thread, so if this has been covered, please don t flame me into oblivion: The major difference being the color of
        Message 3 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          I must confess I have not read the entire thread, so if this has been
          covered, please don't flame me into oblivion:

          The major difference being the color of office.
          The judge's argument is that the officials of the government, used the power
          of their office, to obtain actions beneficial to the government. The
          problem with the statute is that it assumes that the official doing the
          "extorting" is requesting money for themselves. In the bank case, the
          officials were attempting to force money into the bank, now in exchange they
          got special issued preferred stock, only available to the U.S. Government,
          which gave the Govt a stake in the banks.
          (sounds like the mob to me).
          I don't think it will ever go anywhere because I don't think we've got a law
          on the books that covers being reverse robbed. :)
          "Stick em up and take all our money"

          :)
          Brian


          _____

          From: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com]
          On Behalf Of suesarkis@...
          Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 9:55 AM
          To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] Not a good thing - SUE




          In a message dated 4/3/2009 5:19:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
          oracleintl@aol. <mailto:oracleintl%40aol.com> com writes:

          actually wrote that the distinction between extortion and blackmail is that
          extortion is a threat to do something that would otherwise be a lawful act,
          that was a completely ridiculous thing to say, and I defy you to find one
          single source anywhere that says anything like that.

          Bill -

          I do see a difference between 18 USC §§ 872 and 873 and I truly can see
          where he was coming from. Who knows, maybe my mind is just a stupid as his
          honor. One could only hope !!!

          Doesn't this support what he said regarding the matter that he was
          discussing?

          18 USC §872
          §872. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States
          Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any
          department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to
          act as
          such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an
          act
          of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
          three years, or both; but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not
          exceed
          $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one
          year, or both.

          18 USC §873
          §873. Blackmail
          Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not
          informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or
          receives
          any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or
          imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

          Sincerely yours,
          Sue
          ________________________
          Sue Sarkis
          Sarkis Detective Agency

          (est. 1976)
          PI 6564
          _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi <http://www.sarkispi.com/> .com/)

          1346 Ethel Street
          Glendale, CA 91207-1826
          818-242-2505
          818-246-3001 FAX

          "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

          If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
          a military veteran
          **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or

          less. (http://food.
          <http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001>
          aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • oracleintl@aol.com
          Hi Sue, I am not sure the federal statutes would be the best place to look if you hope to find support for that argument since their is no federal extortion
          Message 4 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Sue,
            I am not sure the federal statutes would be the best place to look if you
            hope to find support for that argument since their is no federal extortion
            statute per se, but if you see anything in these code sections that supports the
            contention that the difference between Extortion & Blackmail is that
            Extortion relates to a threat to do something that is otherwise lawful, you are doing
            better than I am.

            § 872. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States

            Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any
            department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to act as
            such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an act
            of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
            three years, or both; but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not exceed
            $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one
            year, or both.



            § 873. Blackmail


            Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not
            informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or receives
            any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or
            imprisoned not more than one year, or both.





            For those who may find the fact that there is no federal extortion statute
            confusing, the same applies to murder -- and for the same reason. Extortion
            is a state crime, as is murder, as well as most other crimes. It becomes a
            matter of federal jurisdiction when there is a federal connection such as is
            the case in Section 872 -- the extortion is by Officers of the United States,
            related to their office.

            There are numerous and various federal offenses connected to extortion, but
            in each case (the target is the President 871, the target is a foreign
            official 878, the demand is delivered by US mail 876, etc) there is some federal
            issue involved.

            If someone walks up to you in California and verbally communicates an
            extortionate threat, it is entirely possible that there is no federal offense
            involved - unless you pay them. While payment is not actually necessary to make
            the offense of extortion complete, there is a separate federal law against
            receiving the proceeds of extortion because that implicates commerce.

            I must, however, retract my prior statement to the effect that the author of
            that ridiculous assertion is a boob. I like boobs, and I have an undying
            fondness for many of the boobs with which it has been my privilege to become
            familiar, so I shall stick with "bonehead" instead.

            Bill







            In a message dated 4/3/2009 10:58:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
            suesarkis@... writes:




            In a message dated 4/3/2009 5:19:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
            _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

            actually wrote that the distinction between extortion and blackmail is that
            extortion is a threat to do something that would otherwise be a lawful act,
            that was a completely ridiculous thing to say, and I defy you to find one
            single source anywhere that says anything like that.

            Bill -

            I do see a difference between 18 USC §§ 872 and 873 and I truly can see
            where he was coming from. Who knows, maybe my mind is just a stupid as his
            honor. One could only hope !!!

            Doesn't this support what he said regarding the matter that he was
            discussing?

            18 USC §872
            §872. Extortion by officers or employees of the United States
            Whoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any
            department or agency thereof, or representing himself to be or assuming to
            act as
            such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an
            act
            of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
            three years, or both; but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not
            exceed
            $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one
            year, or both.

            18 USC §873
            §873. Blackmail
            Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not
            informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or
            receives
            any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or
            imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

            Sincerely yours,
            Sue
            ________________________
            Sue Sarkis
            Sarkis Detective Agency

            (est. 1976)
            PI 6564
            _www.sarkispi._www.s_http://www.sarkispihttp:_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/) )

            1346 Ethel Street
            Glendale, CA 91207-1826
            818-242-2505
            818-246-3001 FAX

            "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

            If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank
            a military veteran
            ************************<WBR>**Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make
            dinne
            less. (_http://food.http://food.<WBhttp://food.http://food.<WBRhttp_
            (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001) )

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
            less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • suesarkis@aol.com
            Bill - The way I understood what he was saying and I could be very wrong is that the government said - a) if you don t let us, than, - b) we will do an
            Message 5 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Bill -

              The way I understood what he was saying and I could be very wrong is that
              the government said -

              a) if you don't let us, than, -

              b) we will do an audit!

              Although an audit is a perfectly lawful act and although the bank swears
              they could withstand an audit as their books are in order and they are not one
              of the banks that holds deeds, etc., the fact still remains that the bank
              feared they could not withstand the financial penalties attached to having to have
              their staff involved over such a long period of time.

              In other words, you don't have to threaten to break someone's bones or kill
              their family members, both unlawful acts, for it to be extortion. Under the
              section he was referring to it was specifically about when the government
              uses its color of authority to impose pressure.

              However, you are the former fed and neither his honor nor I am so therefore,
              I'll capitulate.

              By the way, if I led you to believe that I personally know Judge Napolitano,
              I do apologize as I don't. I've just read his books, reviewed his cases and
              listened to his interviews.


              Sue
              **************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
              less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Slipinn@aol.com
              They had a saying for this back in my Police days. You might beat the rap, but you never beat the ride Chuck Chambers Co-President, Florida Association of
              Message 6 of 9 , Apr 3, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                They had a saying for this back in my Police days.

                "You might beat the rap, but you never beat the ride"


                Chuck Chambers
                Co-President, Florida Association of Private Investigators (FAPI)
                Charter member- FAPI
                Author- The Private Investigator's Handbook
                Recipient of the 2007 Fapi Outstanding service award
                State approved Instructor Class CC intern course-Manatee Community College

                _WWW.ChambersAgency.com_ (http://www.chambersagency.com/)
                Chambers Investigations
                606 49th st w
                Bradenton Florida 34209
                Lic.# A-0001959
                941-798-3804



                In a message dated 4/3/2009 12:25:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
                suesarkis@... writes:




                Bill -

                The way I understood what he was saying and I could be very wrong is that
                the government said -

                a) if you don't let us, than, -

                b) we will do an audit!

                Although an audit is a perfectly lawful act and although the bank swears
                they could withstand an audit as their books are in order and they are not
                one
                of the banks that holds deeds, etc., the fact still remains that the bank
                feared they could not withstand the financial penalties attached to having
                to have
                their staff involved over such a long period of time.

                In other words, you don't have to threaten to break someone's bones or kill
                their family members, both unlawful acts, for it to be extortion. Under the
                section he was referring to it was specifically about when the government
                uses its color of authority to impose pressure.

                However, you are the former fed and neither his honor nor I am so therefore,
                I'll capitulate.

                By the way, if I led you to believe that I personally know Judge Napolitano,
                I do apologize as I don't. I've just read his books, reviewed his cases and
                listened to his interviews.


                Sue
                ************************<WBR>**Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make d
                less. (_http://food.http://food.<WBhttp://food.http://food.<WBRhttp_
                (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001) )

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









                **************Eat Great & Lose Weight FASTER! Start the South Beach Diet
                Online FREE!
                (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221394870x1201432948/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B213623126%3B35100424%3Bk)


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.