WERE CHIEF JOHN BUCKLEY AN HONEST MAN, HE WOULD STEP DOWN AFTER THE DISGRACEFUL L'ITALIEN REPORT WAS PUBLISHED ON THIS NEWS SITE.
City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley / Medford Daily Mercury on or about Nov. 16, 2008 (quoted from the 2nd Judge Jackson-Thompson hearing) saying:
“The one sentiment that I have heard that I take great exception to
“The notion the city would censor or squelch free speech is baseless and as city solicitor I would find any such effort repugnant.” (BUT HAVE YOUR GRANDMA AND YOUR NINE YEAR OLD GET A CORI CHECK TO DISSUADE THEM FROM GOING ON ACCESS TV TO CRITICIZE CITY GOVERNMENT. NOW EXCUSE ME WHILE I TRY TO CENSOR THE L'ITALIEN REPORT WITH ALL MY MIGHT...AND LOSE AGAIN!!!!! - RUMLEY MUST BE THINKING!)
1)BUCKLEY LIED TO THE RESIDENTS OF MEDFORD, ATTEMPTING TO HIDE THE FACT THAT HIS UNCLEAN HANDS WANTED TO PROTECT THE THIN BLUE WALL.
2)DISGRACED EX SOLICITOR MARK E. RUMLEY FAILED TO CENSOR THE L'ITALIEN REPORT THE WAY THE BASTARD CENSORED AN ENTIRE MUNICIPALITY AT MEDFORD ACCESS TV.
RUMLEY, WHO TOOK A WITNESS STAND WHEN HE WASN'T A TRUE WITNESS, ONLY TO TRY TO THROW STONES AT THIS EDITOR, WAS REMOVED WITH TESTIMONY THE JUDGE CALLED "IRRELEVANT"...BRAND THAT ON MARK'S FOREHEAD!
A LAWYER BEING REMOVED FROM A WITNESS STAND...AN OFFICER OF THE COURT...THAT'S HARSH
IN OPEN COURT
WHAT A CLOWN!
(I HAD THE ATTORNEY REMOVED WITH A SIMPLE OBJECTION TO THE JUDGE; DOROTHY'S BUCKET OF WATER REMOVED THE WICKED WITCH WHOSE SOLE PURPOSE WAS TO AID AND ABET A STALKER HARASSING ME; I'M NOT EVEN A LAWYER!)
3)WHY WOULD A CITY LAWYER WORK SO HARD TO CHILL SPEECH?
BECAUSE RUMLEY WAS (AND ALLEGEDLY STILL IS) THE CONSIGLIERE TO A TOTALLY CORRUPT MAYOR, THE DISGRACEFUL BULLY MICHAEL J. MCGLYNN
I'VE SEEN THE REAL MIKE MCGLYNN, IT IS NOT A PRETTY SIGHT. SUCH A NASTY OLD MAN.
UNITED STATES VS. RUMELY IS A NICE TOUCH, DONTCHA THINK?
United States v. Rumely (1953)
Edward Rumely is shown on the left in this 1918 photo. In the early 1950s, Rumely was convicted of contempt after refusing to disclose to a congressional committee who bought political books for further distribution. His conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court, and the Supreme Court affirmed, saying the congressional committee was limited in its inquiry. Rumely, also publishers of the New York Evening Mail, had experienced other government prosecutions. In this photo, he is in the custody of a federal agent after being arrested on charges that he accepted money from the German government to run his newspaper. After his conviction, he was given a presidential pardon by President Calvin Coolidge. (Photo, public domain via Wikimedia.)
The Supreme Court decision in United States v. Rumely, 345 U.S. 41 (1953), took as its basic premise the First Amendment’s prohibition against congressional abridgment of the rights of free speech and a free press.
Rumely convicted of contempt after refusing to tell congressional committee who bought political books
Listen to City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley make a false and fictitious statement to the citizens of Medford:
City Solicitor Mark E. Rumley / Medford Daily Mercury on or about Nov. 16, 2008 (quoted from the 2nd Judge Jackson-Thompson hearing) saying:
“The one sentiment that I have heard that I take great exception to is that the city is trying to limit speech,” said Rumley. “The notion the city would censor or squelch free speech is baseless and as city solicitor I would find any such effort repugnant.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.