Printable View
What a bunch of bs and the supreme court said it was ok to lie about your military record 1st amendment rights .But to live in a lie what A PILE OF SHIT . and the extort money to try and keep them silence PILE OF SHIT . no dd214 to back your play COWARD PILE OF SHIT
That is FUBAR
I got alot of these cases when I was on The Supreme Court.
I should have passed an Executive Order against this when I was President.
Some people, sheesh.
delete
The CO AR-15 Mexi-Mafia will be along shortly to take care of you. [LOL]Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
I hear TEAMRICO is just an underpaid enforcer. [Coffee]
Wow; just wow!
I read the entire write-up posted here and most of the links in the SOCNET site.
I feel for this poor NCO who is facing this retaliatory legal assault from this scumbag attorney.
In my opinion, this never-was should be disbarred & all false claims he's making should be permanently removed. I also feel that he should be required to pay restitution to all those organizations he's defrauded. But then again, this is certainly why he's going so hard after this NCO who is finding evidence of his fraud. Can you imagine what the financial liability would be to this PhD if/when he's proven to be a fraud? His businesses would close and he'd be in debt to bankruptcy & beyond. He knows he's in deep doodoo so he's attacking anyone who questions his validity.
It seems that this guy (attorney) is a Colorado citizen. Anyone know what city he practices law in(can almost assume Pueblo based off of the information in these write-ups). I know that I'll never be using his services or those of any other attorney associated with him.
So, it's not okay (criminal) to impersonate a public safety member (firefighter or LEO) - even if you claim you were just exercising your "1st Amendment rights", but it is okay to fraudulently debunk thousands if not millions of dollars & put people in serious risk of death or injury with poor tactics under the guise of being a certified hero which is really just "stolen valor" which is now protected under the 1st Amendment? Color me crazy and ignorant, but I just don't get this.
The think that is fishy is the people that are defending this guy. I think there's plenty of evidence that this guy is a total fraud, so why does the SOA continue to defend him? Sounds to me like their board of directors is making some $$ off of this guys fraud as well.
The thing that pisses me off the most is that this asshole is making so much trouble for a SF active duty soldier.
They're defending him because he's donated LOTS of $$ to their org ~ just 10k in one payment. Who knows how many payments he's made. He effectively bought his right to claim he's a badass.
Just sent an email to the Association, asking if I could donate money and then claim to be SOF.
Careful, you might get sued!Quote:
Originally Posted by sneakerd