******************************
It's bad enough when Sarah twits away on the internet, putting forth her wisdom in 140 characters or less to her mindless bots who can't read a 'policy statement' to save their lives! Judging by the endless praise her book gets on her OFFICIAL Facebook site, she is reaching out to people who don't read much to begin with. Twitter fits their reading comprehension levels. Got that.
But ... somehow, for some reason ... I expect more from a lawyer. Call me naive. I know many attorneys, and for the most part, they avoid outright lies. Yes, you have to parse (very carefully) how they put forth their argument. Yes, you have to watch closely for what they didn't say, as much as what they DO say.
Thomas Van Flein ACTUALLY quoted a Twitter post, by 'someone' calling himself Levi Johston05 in a court pleading?
Twitter posts? Really?
This is both hilarious and thought provoking.
The obvious conclusion is, as always: if he used a fake Twitter account to support his argument, what OTHER fake/false information is in the pleadings?
What does this say about him, as an attorney?
-That he isn't very concerned with facts.
-That he was confident his request for non-public proceedings would be granted, so nobody would expose his use of a Twitter post as unreliable evidence?
-That he has the same viewpoint as Sarah does: If you say it often enough, it becomes a fact! (and faster if it's on Twitter!)
- That Van Flein (and his associates) don't understand that the Internet, as good as it is at disseminating lies, is ALSO a great tool for truth.
Tommy. Honey.... you have embarassed yourself with this one!
I have written to LeviJohnston05 and asked him to come clean on the joke; he should get a LOT of exposure as the guy who fooled Sarah's big time attorney!
Oh .. wait, that account is INACTIVE NOW ... That must have happened MONTHS ago, when it was Exposed and Debunked by Conan O'Brian who made a public apology blah blah blah ... I guess Tommy and his team of Legal Eagles aren't much better at 'fact checking' than Sarah is!
Lucky for the rest of us, in the sane world, there are bloggers!
SO, Tommy .... join the 21st Century! Here is a reality: Just because Sarah 'says' something, does't make it true! And ... just because a Twitter account has a 'name to it' doesn't make it authentic.
Oh ... and to prove my point, Tommy, I opened a Twitter account myself, I did it under someone ELSE's name!
Guess whose?
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I could guess whose name, but I won't spoil it. What Van Flein has done is incredible. I wonder whether he quoted the phony tweets after Conan apologized to Levi for quoting them.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe either, snowbilly..
ReplyDeleteIt reeks of incompetence AND of total disregard for the truth!
Speaking of cyber sneakery, the Palingates blogspot has been taken down. I first noticed it at 7:05 pm (EST) today, Dec. 29. Wonder how long it will be disappeared?
ReplyDeleteI got there, but some people are having problems.
ReplyDeleteOMG, you are too funny. I am tempted to open a twitter account just so that I can follow your new mystery tweets.
ReplyDeleteThis is a no win for Sarah. All Levi wants is to see his son like any loving father would want to do. He is not a "bleeding heart, tree-hugging, leaf-eating liberal" out to "get" Sarah. And he is not part of the MSM.
ReplyDeleteYet Sarah has decided to launch an all out assault against Levi, a nineteen-year-old, who is guilty of nothing more than wanting to see his child.
This is what happens when someone refuses to kiss Sarah's arse and stands up for his rights. Sarah flies around in erratic circles on her broomstick and makes dive bombing runs towards his head.
Levi knows Sarah, knows she is full of shit, and knows Sarah can't fly and has no magic powers.
That's why he is not afraid of her bluster and bluff.
Do be sure to tweet something good in your new character.
ReplyDeleteSarah, the pitbull, in action (without a "title"):
ReplyDeleteRequest to use pseudonyms = DENIED!
Request to seal documents = DENIED!
Free hairdresser = DENIED!
Free bellhop = DENIED!
Airport luggage = FETCH YOUR OWN LUGGAGE!
Wow, the only credible adult rising above this sordid mess so far is a teenager named Levi.
ReplyDeleteToo bad you're not tweeting as Bristol. You could be "Bristol with a brain."
ReplyDeleteIf Bristol had half a brain, she would know she owns Sarah, especially since the case became unsealed. All she needs to do is threaten to go public with the truth.
Heck, Bristol just might have been doing that for awhile. She has a new car, a nanny, and separate quarters in the "compound." Sarah can threaten to take it all away from Bristol all she wants. Bristol with a brain would just say, "Go ahead. I'll tell everyone how you forced me to file for sole custody."
Bristol did not make an appearance on Sarah's book tour. Neither would Bristol with a brain. Sarah would work for a Bristol with a brain. "No, Mom, no can do. Book tours are boring. And quit crying, will you? It upsets my baby. Now grab me a bag of pretzels and a Diet Coke."
Sloppy legal work there, Tommy, but it's cool.
ReplyDeleteWe're talking about Sarah, here.
She won't know the difference.
Neither will any of the Palinbots.
(We won't tell)
I have more faith in the abilities of the lawyers portrayed on TV than Mr. Van Flein.
ReplyDeleteWell ... Tommy has made a fool of himself with that Twitter Evidence, no getting around that! It's petty, and silly, and desperate and ..... pathetically amateurish.
ReplyDeleteI am sure lawyers all over are having a good chuckle about it ... this is the type of blunder that will forever be identified with him. The Twitter Lawyer!
Sorry, Sarah, you are no longer governor and you cannot keep information confidential merely because the Palin family might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because you may be exposed as a bully.
ReplyDeleteThomas may have been under instructions to lie to the court.
ReplyDeleteSarah may have picked that Twitter post out herself and insisted that Thomas use it.
Nevertheless, Erin, it is customary to tell the truth to a judge.
ReplyDeleteThomas is accountable.
"My client, who is not licensed to practice law, told me to include the twitter in the plea" is not an acceptable excuse for lying to a judge.
Thomas could plead ignorance and say, "I was punked by a Twitter troll."
Mr. Biscuitbarrel, Esq., who has very little interest in $P, was DUMBFOUNDED when I told him what VF had included in his so-called legal filings.
ReplyDeleteMrsTarquin ... I would venture to guess that this would be because Mr Biscuitbarrel has a brain?
ReplyDeleteVan Flein Twitter Evidence is .. just ... so ... amateurish!