"It's illegal for an attorney to discuss his client's case with others, and if it's a prosecutor, they're under the same legal constraints, plus they have their own limited views on cases they prosecute. They can only talk about whatever came out in court after the fact. Anything else that they can say is personal opinion or hearsay."
No, no, no. This attorney had no client in this fight at this time. He was being victimized by powerful forces.
"Going after them for making the claim could jeopardize a bigger investigation, and whether they're impersonating anyone isn't really the issue. They wouldn't be talking about it if it were a secret task force, but you can't find any official references to it."
This is pure hypothetical. I won't engage in it. They have not been charged for impersonating a governmental authority, which is a crime. As I stated earlier, it's a big question mark. Is Timothy Helmseth on the lam? I don't know. There's a website (timholmseth.com) that is called timHolmseth.com (timholmseth.com) and explicitly states at the top of the page -- "Timothy Helmseth is a fraud and fugitive". Now, I'm not defending Holmseth one way or another, but this website is like the shit we use to write on bathroom walls in Junior High about teachers I didn't like -- Teacher "XX sucks c****". Its obvious its intent is for discrediting and ruining Timothy Helmseth. He's still posting articles though and is a free man.
I don't care about the Timothy Holmseth. I only referenced him for the purpose of the interviews surrounding Jacob Wetterling's kidnapping saga.
"The people who are involved in these rings at the higher levels know how to obfuscate the truth and create enough confusion over the facts to throw off any armchair detectives. The fact that there is so much confusion is usually a sign that the person is being protected by crooked people rather than that they're legit whistleblowers."
Timothy Holmseth is not a whistle-blower. Secondly, I don't care about this. It works both ways.
"Where's the link? Nothing comes up in a search. His last Twitter entry was In Dec. 2019."
Here: Field McConnell & Juan O'Savin: The Nixon and Trump connection THE PLAN (ugetube.com)
And I have not watched it. I looked at the date.
"How do you know that's true and not a fake story injected into the Gosch story?"
It's been a long time, but I think it was from another survivor in a Franklin Scandal video interview. Sure, everyone can be lying, but we have to discern it for ourselves. I'd be careful not to unwittingly throw the baby out with the bathwater though. If someone is caught lying it doesn't mean everything they say is a lie. If the devil told only lies, he'd been defeated long ago. There are truths and lies and a mixture in between. I'm just trying to find the 'pearls' that match, so I can establish a theory; an educated guess. I hope you are doing the same.
I've got no more time for you.
I'm good. Thanks. Cheers.
Here: Field McConnell & Juan O'Savin: The Nixon and Trump connection THE PLAN
That's not Field McConnell talking.
And I have not watched it. I looked at the date.
Then why are you referencing stuff you haven't even checked out first? That reflects on your ability to make sound judgments.
I told you I looked at the date of the posting only. And I don't know Field McConnell. He's not in jail as far as I know. It's really irrelevant this path and its blather not germane to my original missive. I'm done with the topic. It sounds like you are too. Thanks. And good tidings to you.
This is pure hypothetical.
No it's not. That's how things are handled in investigations.
They have not been charged for impersonating a governmental authority, which is a crime.
You said you know nothing about it, and now you're trying to tell me you do. Show me where they actually impersonated a government authority. All they've done is claim that they were working for this imaginary task force. What's the point of going after that if they're being investigated for bogger things? It interferes in the bigger investigation.
this website is like the shit we use to write on bathroom walls in Junior High about teachers I didn't like
So what? A lot of people don't believe these guys, including people who create shitty little websites. But more important is the fact that the people these two work with will create those sorts of sites so that people like you will think that the claims are all made up by idiots who make those sorts of websites, and they get them to the top of the search results because Google is working with them. It's a counter-intel tactic. You say I'm posing hypotheticals, but what are you doing here??
He's still posting articles though and is a free man.
He can still post things if he's on the lam. And even if he's free, so what? This is all beside the point.
Timothy Holmseth is not a whistle-blower.
Not a legitimate one. What do you think he's doing posting, though? Why is he posting it?
I don't care about the Timothy Holmseth. I only referenced him for the purpose of the interviews surrounding Jacob Wetterling's kidnapping saga.
Bullshit. Go back and read what you said. You started out by defending him, saying you knew of him when I stated that he's a fake. You've been doing nothing but try to defend him. You mentioned that other guy in passing to make other claims. Now you're even claiming that you know he's not a whistleblower.
Secondly, I don't care about this.
Then why in the fuck are you talking to me??
"Bullshit. Go back and read what you said. You started out by defending him, saying you knew of him when I stated that he's a fake. You've been doing nothing but try to defend him. You mentioned that other guy in passing to make other claims. Now you're even claiming that you know he's not a whistleblower."
You're being really unfair here and you're twisting words. Again, I'm only speaking of his articles concerning the Jacob Wetterling case. You seem to look at things in black and white. "He's a fake". Okay, so everything he wrote, including things that are verified should be tossed into that black bucket. No, That's non-sense. Like I said before, if the devil himself told only lies, we would have defeated him a long time ago. It's not black and white. That narrative is a dead end.
Okay then, he's a waste of time. I'm not going to learn anything from him and I don't trust that sort of person as a source of information. He's there to distract from more important/useful sources and he has a motive to lie.
"Then why in the fuck are you talking to me??"
I only spoke of the Jacob Wetterling aspect of Helmseth's articles that correlated with what I knew from my sources. There are pearls of truth in those articles as I alluded to before. I'm not concerned about "Helmseth is a fraud", albeit I'll keep this in mind. That won't get me to throw out everything he wrote as being a lie. I get to discern and connect what makes sense. Apparently you didn't you get my drift on throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There are pearl's of truth that can be gleaned even from the devil himself. Please don't misunderstand. The original topic was the 191 page Whistleblower affidavit. In that document there are truths that have validity. My conversation with you was to share and learn. I appreciate the input on both Helmseth and McConnell. I'll keep that in mind as time goes on. Time has a way of solving mysteries. Carry on and Cheers.
Like this whole discussion, you can waste a lot of time with shit like Hoilmseth puts out, or you can move on and do some real research. He's there to waste people's time and distract them from more important things.
See ya....
(post is archived)