Tweet
Most people here know that I don't think very highly of Chelene Nightingale. What most people don't seem to understand though, is that my opposition to her is in regards to her as a person, and not a candidate. Chelene has no political history as a representative, and I am one to support a politician based upon habit and history as opposed to promise and faith, so I have no real constructive argument to apply to her in that regard. Californians tend to be fairly faithful in their voting habits and generally lazy in regards to researching their facts, so I don't see what pointing out her factual faults or inconsistencies would do to sway the majority. The willing believers will continue to believe, and the naysayer will continue to boo.
There is one fact that would become an important one should Chelene somehow catapult herself into the governors chair. Chelene, a staunch critic of federal power, and outspoken opponent of federal corruption, gave the feds a huge hammer to hold over her head should there really be enough of a voter revolt to reject the status of all traditional candidates and go with the wild stallion to teach the establishment (and ourselves too) a lesson. She committed perjury in writing on a federal case, and it's recent enough to matter to someone so inclined to use it.
During her 2007 bankruptcy case, Chelene withheld (concealed) several items of interest and one recently acquired debt from the forms a debtor is required to submit under penalty of perjury. The items of interest would be omitting her management of a 501c3 corporation, her stated acting career, and any opportunity for her creditors to examine those for income or other related financial information.The recent debt was incurred just a few weeks prior to her chapter 7 filing, and didn't come to the surface until the creditor sued this year for collection. A debtor is required to list all of their obligations, regardless of their intent to exclude them from protection of the bankruptcy court. The court, the trustee, and the other creditors are entitled to see know the debtors entire financial situation, and to be given the opportunity to object if one creditor is being given preferential treatment. I don't know if the creditor in this case was given preferential treatment, as it appears that they were unaware of her bankruptcy filing until much after it took place. Due to the short time frame between the when the debt was incurred and Chelene's BK filing, the debtor may have a case for fraudulent intent, however that is more of a state issue than a federal one, and for the purposes of this article I'm going to stay focused on what applies to federal laws and leverage. At any time for the next few years, the federal government can exercise the option to prosecute Chelene Nightingale and her Husband michael for perjury. this could be at the insistance of one or more of the creditors in the case, the bankruptcy trustee, or some prosecutor with an incentive of their own. Why would anyone want to elect a politician to high office that has provoked the federal government, threatened to curb their power, and openly urged others to do so, while having given them a nearly undesputable opportunity to prosecute them for a crime of morality such as perjury? Would Californian's take a risk that Chelene, in an effort to avoid prosecution, capitulate to federal domination during her term as governor? Even should she refuse to cooperate, the feds could charge her with the crime and fairly easily get her removed from office, letting the newly elected Lt. Governor fill her remaining term. I would urge you to review the most likely holders of that office after this election.
Gavin Newsome?
So you see, Chelene's glass house is not merely based upon her mysterious qualifications and lack of historical reference. It's based upon her gift to the federal power base in washington of a box of rocks and a bold map to the target.
There is one fact that would become an important one should Chelene somehow catapult herself into the governors chair. Chelene, a staunch critic of federal power, and outspoken opponent of federal corruption, gave the feds a huge hammer to hold over her head should there really be enough of a voter revolt to reject the status of all traditional candidates and go with the wild stallion to teach the establishment (and ourselves too) a lesson. She committed perjury in writing on a federal case, and it's recent enough to matter to someone so inclined to use it.
During her 2007 bankruptcy case, Chelene withheld (concealed) several items of interest and one recently acquired debt from the forms a debtor is required to submit under penalty of perjury. The items of interest would be omitting her management of a 501c3 corporation, her stated acting career, and any opportunity for her creditors to examine those for income or other related financial information.The recent debt was incurred just a few weeks prior to her chapter 7 filing, and didn't come to the surface until the creditor sued this year for collection. A debtor is required to list all of their obligations, regardless of their intent to exclude them from protection of the bankruptcy court. The court, the trustee, and the other creditors are entitled to see know the debtors entire financial situation, and to be given the opportunity to object if one creditor is being given preferential treatment. I don't know if the creditor in this case was given preferential treatment, as it appears that they were unaware of her bankruptcy filing until much after it took place. Due to the short time frame between the when the debt was incurred and Chelene's BK filing, the debtor may have a case for fraudulent intent, however that is more of a state issue than a federal one, and for the purposes of this article I'm going to stay focused on what applies to federal laws and leverage. At any time for the next few years, the federal government can exercise the option to prosecute Chelene Nightingale and her Husband michael for perjury. this could be at the insistance of one or more of the creditors in the case, the bankruptcy trustee, or some prosecutor with an incentive of their own. Why would anyone want to elect a politician to high office that has provoked the federal government, threatened to curb their power, and openly urged others to do so, while having given them a nearly undesputable opportunity to prosecute them for a crime of morality such as perjury? Would Californian's take a risk that Chelene, in an effort to avoid prosecution, capitulate to federal domination during her term as governor? Even should she refuse to cooperate, the feds could charge her with the crime and fairly easily get her removed from office, letting the newly elected Lt. Governor fill her remaining term. I would urge you to review the most likely holders of that office after this election.
Gavin Newsome?
So you see, Chelene's glass house is not merely based upon her mysterious qualifications and lack of historical reference. It's based upon her gift to the federal power base in washington of a box of rocks and a bold map to the target.
Comment