Bribery Allegations Against Bill Goichberg
Veresov
away on her blog and on chessdiscussion at Bill Goichberg, alleging that he
engaged in bribery regarding delegate seating at last August's annual
meeting in Dallas. Perhaps Mr. Innes or another in contact with
Polgar/Truong can answer this question. Have Polgar, Truong and/or their
counsel taken these allegations to the appropriate law enforcement
agency(s)? If they have not, I would urge them to do so at the earliest
convenient time. Indeed, in-as-much-as Ms. Estrello is monitoring my rgcp
postings, I would urge her to consider her duty as an officer of the court
to report this alleged bribery to law enforcement if she feels in, her
professional judgment, that there is a prima facie case to be made against
Mr. Goitchberg as I did with Mr. Truong and his bankruptcy matter in the
Eastern District of New York.
Brian Lafferty
For A Better USCF
http://mysite.verizon.net/vzewuo9u/brianlaffertyforabetteruscf/
randyba...@yahoo.com
Oh, that's right - a bankruptcy matter. Can you give us an update on
that?
Starwarz...@aol.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Vidmar March 11
Lubbock Paper Notes Truong Bankruptcy Fraud Allegation
TTU isn't going to help Truong falsify his TTU start date. I bet
that
when the USCF subpoenas his payroll records, they will cut him loose
to
swing in the West Texas wind.
Chess group levels charges at Tech employee
By Marlena Hartz | AVALANCHE-JOURNAL
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Story last updated at 3/11/2009 - 1:32 am
A national chess organization has accused a Texas Tech Chess
Institute
employee of fraud, breach of duty, defamation and conspiracy, actions
that it claims cost the organization hundreds of thousands of dollars
and damaged its reputation.
Paul Truong, marketing and public relations director for the Susan
Polgar Institute for Chess Excellence, denied the allegations on
Tuesday. Truong is the husband of the institute's founder, chess
champion Susan Polgar.
Officials with the U.S. Chess Federation claim Truong lied about his
professional background during his campaign for a seat on the
federation's executive board, giving false statements about having
advanced degrees and making a fortune in executive positions with
billion-dollar companies.
"I don't even know what to say. It's the same nonsense going back and
forth," Truong said of the federation's most recent allegations.
Truong said federation associates make false allegations against him
and
his wife because they are jealous of her success and fear losing
political power to her in the chess world.
Legal tiffs between the couple and federation associates began after
the
husband and wife won board seats in 2007. Chess writer Sam Sloan
accused
them of posting obscene Internet messages in his name, which they've
repeatedly denied authoring. A judge dismissed his suit, but the
federation and its associates have continued to pursue charges
against
the couple in various courts.
The chess federation filed the complaint against Truong on March 5,
adding it as a third-party complaint in a libel and slander lawsuit
that
Polgar filed against the federation last year.
The complaint also accuses Truong of lying on his June 2007
bankruptcy
filing. It says Truong reported he was unemployed when he was
employed
at Tech.
Truong admitted to filing for bankruptcy in 2007 after a divorce, but
told The Avalanche-Journal he wasn't employed by the university until
September. ***The university, which has a policy against commenting
on
pending litigation, recorded his start date as June 1, according to
information the university's office of communications provided.***
University officials announced the creation of Polgar's chess
institute
about a month prior.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/browse_thread/thread/035c42c8e0a7eac8?hl=en#
Veresov
news:a0f57d82-83d0-402c...@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
I have heard nothing since my last update from the Queens Country District
Attorney's Office confirming that the matter had been sent to the US
Attorney for review. The last I heard regarding that was confirmation from
the civil bankruptcy trustee that there was an ongoing criminal
investigation by the US Attorney regarding Mr. Truong's June, 2007
bankruptcy petition. More than that I don't know.
--
foad
"Veresov" <ver...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:EJmdnSBNia6ClovX...@giganews.com...
> I would urge her to consider her duty as an officer of the court to report
> this alleged bribery to law enforcement if she feels in, her professional
> judgment, that there is a prima facie case to be made against Mr.
> Goitchberg as I did with Mr. Truong and his bankruptcy
Are you claiming to have reported Truong because of your "duty as an officer
of the court," you sanctimonious gasbag? If so, it's convenient that your
alleged duty dovetailed so neatly with your obvious obsessions.
Question: Do you have a duty as an officer of the court to report your
jointly and severally liable codefendant as on the one hand an alleged
judgment proof forma pauperis indigent and on the other a fully capitalized
publisher of various chess materials, or don't your important duties extend
in that direction?
Starwarz...@aol.com
by Bill Goichberg - www.Checkmate.us -
http://www.uschess.org/legalupdates/Site/PolgarTruong_files/Filed%20C...
Starwarz...@aol.com
- www.checkmate.us -
http://www.uschess.org/legalupdates/Site/PolgarTruong_files/Filed%20C...
MrVidmar
>
> "Veresov" <ver...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> news:EJmdnSBNia6ClovX...@giganews.com...
>
>> I would urge her to consider her duty as an officer of the court to
>> report this alleged bribery to law enforcement if she feels in, her
>> professional judgment, that there is a prima facie case to be made
>> against Mr. Goitchberg as I did with Mr. Truong and his bankruptcy
>
> Are you claiming to have reported Truong because of your "duty as an
> officer of the court," you sanctimonious gasbag? If so, it's convenient
> that your alleged duty dovetailed so neatly with your obvious obsessions.
In-as-much-as there was, IMO, overwhelming evidence of a prima facie
case of bankruptcy fraud having been perpetrated by Mr. Truong on the
Federal bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of NY, the answer to
your question is yes. The civil bankruptcy trustee, Mr. Getzler,
confirmed in writing that a criminal fraud investigation has been
commenced by the US Attorney. Further, the Queens Country District
Attorney's Office advised me that they wanted to prosecute Mr. Truong
for fraud, but that the US Attorney had first dibs in prosecuting the
case. The Queens DA's Office sent the file to the US Attorney for
review and Mr. Getzler subsequently confirmed the existence of a
criminal investigation that is, AFAIK, ongoing. I trust that answers
your question as to my having done the correct and proper thing as a
citizen and an attorney with a duty to uphold the laws or the state and
federal government.
>
> Question: Do you have a duty as an officer of the court to report your
> jointly and severally liable codefendant as on the one hand an alleged
> judgment proof forma pauperis indigent and on the other a fully
> capitalized publisher of various chess materials, or don't your
> important duties extend in that direction?
You question makes no sense, Mr. Foad. I suggest that you speak with
your attorney and rephrase it.
foad
"MrVidmar" <vid...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:GJ-dncfO26W7NovX...@giganews.com...
> foad wrote:
>>
>> "Veresov" <ver...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
>> news:EJmdnSBNia6ClovX...@giganews.com...
>>
>>> I would urge her to consider her duty as an officer of the court to
>>> report this alleged bribery to law enforcement if she feels in, her
>>> professional judgment, that there is a prima facie case to be made
>>> against Mr. Goitchberg as I did with Mr. Truong and his bankruptcy
>>
>> Are you claiming to have reported Truong because of your "duty as an
>> officer of the court," you sanctimonious gasbag? If so, it's convenient
>> that your alleged duty dovetailed so neatly with your obvious obsessions.
>
> In-as-much-as there was, IMO, overwhelming evidence of a prima facie
> case of bankruptcy fraud having been perpetrated by Mr. Truong on the
> Federal bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of NY, the answer to
> your question is yes. The civil bankruptcy trustee, Mr. Getzler,
> confirmed in writing that a criminal fraud investigation has been
> commenced by the US Attorney. Further, the Queens Country District
> Attorney's Office advised me that they wanted to prosecute Mr. Truong
> for fraud, but that the US Attorney had first dibs in prosecuting the
> case. The Queens DA's Office sent the file to the US Attorney for
> review and Mr. Getzler subsequently confirmed the existence of a
> criminal investigation that is, AFAIK, ongoing. I trust that answers
> your question as to my having done the correct and proper thing as a
> citizen and an attorney with a duty to uphold the laws or the state and
> federal government.
It doesn't answer shit laughingstock. It's just more gas.
>> Question: Do you have a duty as an officer of the court to report your
>> jointly and severally liable codefendant as on the one hand an alleged
>> judgment proof forma pauperis indigent and on the other a fully
>> capitalized publisher of various chess materials, or don't your
>> important duties extend in that direction?
>
> You question makes no sense, Mr. Foad.
It makes perfect sense you semi literate fuckstain. You claim to have acted
based upon a duty to the court OTOH and make common cause with a convicted
felon who perpetrates fraud on the court on a daily basis OTO.
> I suggest that you speak with
> your attorney and rephrase it.
Legal advice from an administrative law fucking judge: priceless.
Veresov
news:M0BRl.38$9L2...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Have a nice weekend. :-)
--
samsloan
unfortunately is typical of a lot of things that Bill does behind the
scenes that the general chess-playing public rarely finds out about.
What Bill Goichberg did was he gave a non-chess player who had never
previously been a USCF member previously a special six-months
membership at the non-advertised rate of $25, and then made this
person a delegate from the State of New York at the USCF Delegate's
Meeting in August in Dallas.
The person's name was "Hero Smith" which was probably not his real
name.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?14000293
This was done to get enough votes to try to oust Paul Truong from the
USCF Executive Board.
Then what happened was the dirty rat reneged on the deal Goichberg had
made with him and voted in favor of Truong rather than against him,
thereby enabling Truong to survive the effort to oust him by a tiny
margin.
I feel that the USCF Members in New York State should be outraged that
Goichberg used his position as head of the New York State Delegation
to do this.
Unfortunately, this is just one of a long list of things like this
that Bill Goichberg has done over the years.
Sam Sloan
samsloan
March 16, 2009, which is available online. Not all of her allegations
are false. This one is true:
42. Defendants Hanken, Hough and Goichberg wanted so badly to see
Truong removed from the Board that they even went as far as bribing a
USCF member, Jessica Lauser, and her husband, Hero Smith, with free
hotel accommodations, airline tickets, tournament entry fees, meals
and future writing opportunities in exchange for them to come to
Dallas for the Delegates Meeting and vote to remove Truong. Lauser was
never a Delegate, and Smith was not even a member of the USCF until
days before the USCF Delegates’ Meeting, when Hanken, Hough and
Goichberg paid Smith's membership fees. Hough and Goichberg then
certified both Lauser and Smith as Delegates so they could vote
against Truong in the motions to remove Truong from the Executive
Board. After the "USCF trial" against Truong, Lauser and Smith voted
against removing Truong from the Executive Board. Despite attending
the meeting with the purpose of voting for Truong’s removal, they
changed their votes after hearing facts Truong presented in his
defense and which facts were suppressed by Defendants Kronenberger,
Goichberg, Hall, Hough, Hanken, and Berry.
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
>
> It makes perfect sense you semi literate fuckstain.
Oh, and you're the respective
unwashed literal fuckstained sheet.
--
Wlod
samsloan
posted without evidence that she was guilty of bribery or some other
criime. But when she and her Anonymouses accuse me of bribery with no
evidence whatsoever, and even say that charges are going to be filed
against me, it's not sinking very low to poke fun at such posts and
her use of "Anonymous" posters.
Bill Goichberg[/quote]
As you well know, what she is complaining about is that in Dallas you
made someone named "Hero Smith" (almost certainly a fake name) a
delegate from the Great State of New York, even though he resides I
think in Alaska, plus someone paid $25 for him to join the USCF, plus
I think he might have gotten a free hotel room in the deal too, just
so that he would vote for the anti-Truong and Polgar motions.
Then he reneged on the deal and voted the opposite way from the way he
was supposed to vote.
There is a lot of evidence that this happened. For example, I saw it
happen. So did many other delegates.
So, it is not true that there is no evidence for this.
What is true is that the forum moderators have blocked all discussion
of this. Maybe they will block this posting too.
Sam Sloan
Rob
> foad wrote:
>
> > "Veresov" <vere...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> < 1KViewDownload
Brian,
If he did this on the advise of an attorney, isn't it true it's the
attorney who is really in hot water here?
Mike Murray
wrote:
>Brian,
>If he did this on the advise of an attorney, isn't it true it's the
>attorney who is really in hot water here?
Adults are responsible for their conduct. Do you think if an attorney
tells you to do something illegal, you get a "king's x" on it ?? The
attorney might *also* get in trouble. Penalty might be mitigated.
samsloan
> You saw exactly WHAT happen? That I appointed Hero Smith? This is evidence
> of "bribery!?"
>
> New York had many open delegate spots, and in response to various requests,
> as NYSCA President I appointed out of state residents Tom Braunlich, Frank
> Berry, Trevor Jackson, Quayle Johnson and Hero Smith. I had no discussions
> with any of them regarding how they would vote on any issue, and certainly
> did not pay any of them to vote any particular way on any issue.
>
> I did not pay USCF dues for any of these people, nor provide any with a free
> hotel room or any other benefit. I believe that you are correct that Hero
> Smith voted against the anti-Truong motions.
>
> Bill Goichberg
This is the typical cover-up and the false and misleading statements
that we often hear from Bill Goichberg. Anybody left who still
believes that Bill Goichberg is an honest man should pay close
attention to this one.
Hero Smith was a non-chess player who had never been a USCF member and
had never played a rated game of chess in his life. In order to get
passed an anti-Truong and Polgar vote in Dallas, $25 was provided to
give Hero Smith a 6-months USCF membership, under a little known and
non-advertised dues rate. Hero was then made both a USCF member and a
delegate from New York State. Goichberg claims that he did not pay the
$25. However, he knew about it. What we have here is a conspiracy,
where each person in the conspiracy did their part.
Just about everybody knows the truth. Goichberg will not be able to
get away with this one, especially since this is part of Polgar's
lawsuit in Texas.
Similarly, Goichberg today wrote in response to my postcard:
"Sloan says, "I pledge to restore the USCF to what it once was a few
years ago and to start mailing either Chess Life or Chess Life for
Kids to ALL regular members." However, regular members have
voluntarily chosen to receive their magazine only in online form in
order to pay lower dues."
Goichberg's statement is not true. If a poll were taken I am certain
that very few regular members realize that they are no longer
receiving Chess Life and almost none of them agreed not to receive
Chess Life any more. Around 50% of all USCF members are members only
so that they will receive Chess Life, as they receive no other
benefit.
To those of us who are familiar with Goichberg, these mis-
representations are typical and common for him. Unfortunately, few
regular members realize that Goichberg makes false and misleading and
frankly dishonest statements all the time.
Sam Sloan
jkh001
samsloan wrote:
>
> "Sloan says, "I pledge to restore the USCF to what it once was a few
> years ago and to start mailing either Chess Life or Chess Life for
> Kids to ALL regular members." However, regular members have
> voluntarily chosen to receive their magazine only in online form in
> order to pay lower dues."
>
> Goichberg's statement is not true. If a poll were taken I am certain
> that very few regular members realize that they are no longer
> receiving Chess Life and almost none of them agreed not to receive
> Chess Life any more. Around 50% of all USCF members are members only
> so that they will receive Chess Life, as they receive no other
> benefit.
>
>
> Sam Sloan
You really think the members are morons, Sam? So all those people who
signed up for non-magazine memberships /really believed/ that they
were going to keep on getting the magazine for $20 less than they had
been paying before? And the ones who joined at tournaments just didn't
listen when the options were explained to them? Well, I suppose you
have to assume most USCF members are of subnormal intelligence, or
you'd have no chance at all of getting elected.
Vote sanity. Make this the Sloon's last honk.
help bot
It looks like everybody has missed the boat here.
According to the text above, Mr. Goichberg flat-out
lied by asserting that USCF members "voluntarily"...
"chose" to receive no magazine; obviously, since
dues were raised, they faced a no-win scenario in
which they could either *pay more* and keep on
receiving the mediocre magazine as before; or
they could "choose" to be done-in another way--
which is not exactly what the sneak, BG, was
asserting above.
At the same time, Mr. Sloan -- once again -- re-
veals his uncanny ability to invent "facts", such as
the results of some nonexistant poll, purportedly
indicating that some random percentage of USCF
members "only to receive Chess Life", etc. This
poor fellow needs to learn that destroying his own
credibility was *never* the best way to get elected;
just the reverse, I think. Oh well, there is no
sense crying over spilt (long ago) milk.
As for making that one "honk" Mr. Sloan's last via
not electing him to the USCF board, I think it is all
too obvious that Mr. Sloan is not on the board now,
yet he has been "honking" non-stop here in rgc as
well as elsewhere. The only way to shut a goose
up is to shoot it, stuff it and cook it; but as I under-
stand the law, it makes no difference how annoyed
one is-- neurotic/psychotic anthropoids are protect-
ed from being shot, despite all the rhetoric regard-
ing the greatest good for the greatest number.
In a way, Mr. Goichberg is quite lucky to have as
adversary a man so utterly inept, and who has so
utterly destroyed his own reputation over the years.
Few will take the honking of Mr. Sloan seriously,
yet he still has /name recognition/ (just as did Jack
the Ripper, Billy the Kid, and Alphonse Capone);
we will soon see if that alone can get Mr. Sloan re-
elected.
-- help bot
samsloan
> You really think the members are morons, Sam? So all those people who
> signed up for non-magazine memberships /really believed/ that they
> were going to keep on getting the magazine for $20 less than they had
> been paying before?
Those people did not "sign up for non-magazine memberships". Rather,
they simply renewed their regular membership not realizing that
regular members no longer receive Chess Life magazine.
I know several people who did this and I almost did this myself.
Sam Sloan
help bot
"...Mr. Goichberg is quite lucky to have as adversary
a man so utterly inept..." -- astute observer
> Those people did not "sign up for non-magazine memberships". Rather,
> they simply renewed their regular membership not realizing that
> regular members no longer receive Chess Life magazine.
>
> I know several people who did this and I almost did this myself.
"...utterly inept"
-- now *proved*-astute observer
samsloan
a member of the USCF and Bill Goichberg almost simultaneously made
"Hero Smith" a delegate from New York. In addition, his wife Jessica
Lauser was made a delegate from Southern California and was given free
entry into the US Open and they were given a hotel room.
http://www.uschess.org/msa/MbrDtlMain.php?12593821
All this was done so that they would vote against Polgar and Truong.
Then they reneged on the deal by not only voting in favor of Polgar
and Truong, but Jessica Lauser actually got up and made a speech in
favor of Polgar and Truong. You can see it on the video.
This is one of the reasons why the USCF is being sued in Polgar vs.
USCF and Goichberg.
This is why process servers right now are trying to serve subpoenas on
Jessica Lauser and Hero Smith, to find out what deals they made first
with Goichberg and later with Polgar. Meanwhile Jessica and Hero have
absconded to Alaska, where process servers are searching for them, the
last I heard.
Sam Sloan
Rob
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:18:36 -0700 (PDT), Rob <robmt...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Brian,
> >If he did this on the advise of an attorney, isn't it true it's the
> >attorney who is really in hot water here?
>
> Adults are responsible for their conduct. Do you think if an attorney
> tells you to do something illegal, you get a "king's x" on it ?? The
> attorney might *also* get in trouble. Penalty might be mitigated.
Mike,
you are right. Adults are responsible for their actions. However if
you consult and officer of the court and they advise you and direct
you to do something a certain way then you follow their directions. I
believe that by following the attroneys directions you have mitigated
your exposure. You may still be fined but the attorneys professional
liability insurance will most likely be the pockets that end up paying
for the violation. That policy may also end up paying you personally
for damages.
samsloan
vs. USCF, filed March 16, 2009 in Lubbock Texas Federal Court, which
is available online at PACER. Not all of her allegations are false.
Rob
It seems odd that even after Truong was cleared by a vote of the
delegates after they heard all of the testamony, the USCF would still
decide to pursure litigation against him. Looks like he was tried ,in
a sense, by a jury of his peers and found not guilty. The resulting
losses the USCF is suffering them are as a result of their continued
pursuit of actions against Polgar and Truong.
Like I said before. This is not going to end well for anyone involved.
Mike Murray
wrote:
>It seems odd that even after Truong was cleared by a vote of the
>delegates after they heard all of the testamony, the USCF would still
>decide to pursure litigation against him. Looks like he was tried ,in
>a sense, by a jury of his peers and found not guilty. The resulting
>losses the USCF is suffering them are as a result of their continued
>pursuit of actions against Polgar and Truong.
>Like I said before. This is not going to end well for anyone involved.
As I understand it, this is not what happened at all. The delegates
declined to take action. Not the same as finding innocent. Not the
same as clearing. Nothing like a trial.
From what I've read, the delegates were aware of active litigation and
many believed they should do nothing until it played out in court.
I believe this is essentially what people like you and Phil were
saying, until it started to look like the court cases would not play
out as you hoped. Then you became disciples of mediation or started
arguing procedural issues.
Rob
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:28:02 -0700 (PDT), Rob <robmt...@gmail.com>
Mike,
It's gone too far for mediation. It's going to be settled one way or
another in court I think. What I have always said was that publicly
trying them via news groups was not helpful. I also believe in no
small part news group discussions indirectly led to escalation of the
issue. And I will also say that I believe this will end badly for both
parties regardless of who wins or looses
None
> It is quite well known that Jerry Hanken paid $25 to make "Hero Smith"
> a member of the USCF and Bill Goichberg almost simultaneously made
> "Hero Smith" a delegate from New York. In addition, his wife Jessica
> Lauser was made a delegate from Southern California and was given free
> entry into the US Open and they were given a hotel room.
> Then they reneged on the deal by not only voting in favor of Polgar
> and Truong, but Jessica Lauser actually got up and made a speech in
> favor of Polgar and Truong. You can see it on the video.
> This is one of the reasons why the USCF is being sued in Polgar vs.
> USCF and Goichberg.
> This is why process servers right now are trying to serve subpoenas on
> Jessica Lauser and Hero Smith, to find out what deals they made first
> with Goichberg and later with Polgar. Meanwhile Jessica and Hero have
> absconded to Alaska, where process servers are searching for them, the
> last I heard.
A record. Familiar as I am with the work of politicians, few can pack
lies and distortions into a small space as well as Sam. But the above is
very accurate, mainly because Sam copied it almost verbatim from SP's
complaint. Sam will shortly revert to form, be sure.
Rob.
Pay no heed to Murray. He is a usenet blowhard. The principal distinction
between Murray and O'Laugherty is that Murray uses a spell-chicker. Each
is ignorant, bigoted, unprincipled and is almost always wrong. Murray's
blind monkey bullshit is a work of epic hypocrisy and double standards.
A few open-handed slaps is what Murray needs most of all. There are many
who are more than willing to - now - grant him what he deserves. Spinrad
aside, Murray is the most ignorant contributor to discussions. Lastly,
Murray isn't even an attorney, which is his one and only saving grace.
I noted that the n.g. lunatic, Mad Marcus, has started posting using my
handle "NONE". I am the one original "None" and should not be confused
with other nones or nobodys. O'Laugherty's 37th handle was "nobody", a
fitting choice given his lowly status and import. None is not a nobody.
I'm voting for Sam Sloan and encourage everyone else to do the same. It
is beyond dispute that the quicker the USCF dies, the better it is for
all concerned. Except the vultures, for whom I don't give a damn. The
question does not seem to be whether all pedophiles are chessplayers,
but whether all chessplayers are pedophiles. Mission accomplished, Sam.
You finally managed to get what you've always craved - 'FAME', though a
more appropriate word for it exists.
Mike Murray
>A few open-handed slaps is what Murray needs most of all. There are many
>who are more than willing to - now - grant him what he deserves.
The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak and flabby. Where are all
these folks? I might have to sic the Grim Repa on 'em.
>Spinrad
>aside, Murray is the most ignorant contributor to discussions. Lastly,
>Murray isn't even an attorney, which is his one and only saving grace.
Being a man of the cloth, I can negotiate forgiveness for your many
sins, although penance might be unpleasant. OK, maggot, drop down and
give me twenty -- now, twenty more with my foot on your back.
None
that wasn't me writing that...someone spoofed me...Charlie is back to
his old tricks again
Mike Murray
wrote:
I should have noticed: the dumdum from Dizum.
samsloan
their own US Open expenses- airfare, hotel, food etc., except Hero's
temp USCF membership dues (Which I paid because Hero wanted to play in
a side event and they were broke. The bribery charge is a Hitlerism
BIG LIE!! Bill should sue both Sam and Polar for repeating this
calumny. There was NEVER any discussion as to how they would vote and
they both voted against recall. (Jessica later confided that they did
so because Hero, half Asian, empathized with fellow Asian Troung and
she voted out of loyalty to her husband!) .This nonsense should be put
to rest pronto
Jerry Hanken
madams
@ least he's literate...
samsloan
This one is really going to fool a lot of readers. I agree with every
statement within it, except one. The only reason I recognize it as a
forgery is that I am the Real Sam Sloan and I know I did not write it.
Paul can't be doing this, and Bill isn't able to do this. So Bill may
be paying one or more people to do this. The question is, who, and why.
The Really, Really Real Sam Sloan
Here are the headers from the dizum anonymizer:
From: samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups:
rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Bribery Allegations Against Bill Goichberg
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:52:01 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Path: g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!
news.wiretrip.org!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <64be2a75-492b-465e-800f-c51b368dc...@mixmaster.nymu.eu>
References: <EJmdnSBNia6ClovXnZ2dnUVZ_uqdn...@giganews.com>
<212f7f7b-c59f-4bb0-a013-6dd17ed95...@k38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.126.163.11
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1245181921 3758 127.0.0.1 (16 Jun 2009
19:52:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:52:01 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: w40g2000yqd.googlegroups.com; posting-host=69.126.163.11;
posting-account=h0BplggAAACbakJwttbpVF72VZ8jVCAq
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.0.11)
Gecko/2009060215 Firefox/3.0.11,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Mail-To-News-Contact: ab...@dizum.com