😂 you’re allegations are based on no single statute or actual evidence. Purely a hyperbolic straw man. People need to learn critical thinking skills and put their ideologies in check.
April 7, 2010 online article by PA reporter: "...West Whiteland Police Department and the Chester County [Pennsylvania] Detectives explained how they had been able to determine who had been regularly going into Kelley’s e-mail, reading her messages, and changing her password, studying the contents of her computer’s hard drive."
1. Can't read a computer's hard drive by accessing email accounts!!
2. Chester County Judge Thomas Gavin, DAs Carroll and Krilivsky, Public Defenders Schenker and Bey, West Whiteland Township Patrolman Meshurle, and the commission all thought this was true.
3. So did the PA appellate court judges, to include the PA Supreme Court Justice Castille.
4. Then the federal court judge for the eastern district of PA--Judge Curtis Joyner--also thought this was true and denied defendants petitions under the 14th Amendment.
5. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals judges believed a computer's hard drive could be accessed by reading an email account and affirmed Judge Joyner's ruling.
6. SCOTUS twice denied petitions for certiorari, degrading the petitioner as frivolous and his arguments as based on meritless legal theory. SCOTUS per curiam banned the petitioner from communicating with the US Supreme Court, denying his right to seek relief and to peaceably redress grievances against the government.
Several years later, Microsoft Corp v US (2016) asserted emails are stored on a server at the provider's locations, not personal computers.
SCOTUS justices Roberts, Alito, Breyer, Thomas and Sotomayor have never apologized to the man, nor admitted to their mistake, because they want to be seen as infallible. The other 4 justices involved are replaced.
As an aside, the ruling Van Buren v US (2021) was also taken from this man's appeals, almost verbatim, that "unlawful access" of an email account is not a valid charge on an indictment or warrant, it must be "exceeding authorization" or "unauthorized access." Why did Professor Claudine Gay have to resign for plagiarizing when SCOTUS justices didn't?
The man had been assigned to the National Security Agency during the time the internet was formed, and had taken a class from Jim Flyzik in the early '90s, shortly after Flyzik was named the head of computer and internet security for the US Treasury Department.
BYE BYE DUHSANCTIS
I’m in Fla. This guy opposed Trump after Trump helped get DeSantis elected. Trump never forgets disloyalty. Enuf said
😂 you’re allegations are based on no single statute or actual evidence. Purely a hyperbolic straw man. People need to learn critical thinking skills and put their ideologies in check.
Great job!
Another scandal?
April 7, 2010 online article by PA reporter: "...West Whiteland Police Department and the Chester County [Pennsylvania] Detectives explained how they had been able to determine who had been regularly going into Kelley’s e-mail, reading her messages, and changing her password, studying the contents of her computer’s hard drive."
1. Can't read a computer's hard drive by accessing email accounts!!
2. Chester County Judge Thomas Gavin, DAs Carroll and Krilivsky, Public Defenders Schenker and Bey, West Whiteland Township Patrolman Meshurle, and the commission all thought this was true.
3. So did the PA appellate court judges, to include the PA Supreme Court Justice Castille.
4. Then the federal court judge for the eastern district of PA--Judge Curtis Joyner--also thought this was true and denied defendants petitions under the 14th Amendment.
5. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals judges believed a computer's hard drive could be accessed by reading an email account and affirmed Judge Joyner's ruling.
6. SCOTUS twice denied petitions for certiorari, degrading the petitioner as frivolous and his arguments as based on meritless legal theory. SCOTUS per curiam banned the petitioner from communicating with the US Supreme Court, denying his right to seek relief and to peaceably redress grievances against the government.
Several years later, Microsoft Corp v US (2016) asserted emails are stored on a server at the provider's locations, not personal computers.
SCOTUS justices Roberts, Alito, Breyer, Thomas and Sotomayor have never apologized to the man, nor admitted to their mistake, because they want to be seen as infallible. The other 4 justices involved are replaced.
As an aside, the ruling Van Buren v US (2021) was also taken from this man's appeals, almost verbatim, that "unlawful access" of an email account is not a valid charge on an indictment or warrant, it must be "exceeding authorization" or "unauthorized access." Why did Professor Claudine Gay have to resign for plagiarizing when SCOTUS justices didn't?
The man had been assigned to the National Security Agency during the time the internet was formed, and had taken a class from Jim Flyzik in the early '90s, shortly after Flyzik was named the head of computer and internet security for the US Treasury Department.
Just another sleazoid politician. I hope this ruins this grifter family FOREVER!