Title 18, "Misprision of treason" filed in District Court

[Christophera]

In reality the public is not nearly as gullible and fearful as you agents may hope.

Certainly they are confused and distracted, which is your goal in servide to treason, however, your repeated failure to substantiate the steel core columns evidences the fact that you and the other agents opposing me have NO INTEREST IN THE TRUTH.

The public sees this but cannot comprehend HOW such behaviors are created by the infiltrators. A best, or worst, the public is undecided. If the public were to be confronted with the evidence for the concrete core and the other info introduced to mislead about steel core columns they would realize immediately that the steel core columns are NOT independently shown, with consistent evidence. to have existed.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

We don't have to substantiate the steel core columns. Robertson, FEMA & NIST did that for us. It is up to you to provide proof of your concrete core theory.

Since none of your photos ever show a concrete core, either you're full of shit, or it was made up of the one & only Invisicrete(accept no substitutes)

Again, no one believes you Chri$$y, not even this guy'

 

[Christophera]

We don't have to substantiate the steel core columns. Robertson, FEMA & NIST did that for us. It is up to you to provide proof of your concrete core theory.

Since none of your photos ever show a concrete core, either you're full of shit, or it was made up of the one & only Invisicrete(accept no substitutes)

Again, no one believes you Chri$$y, not even this guy'
View attachment 10436

I appreciate the personal promotion but your unsubstantiated efforts to conceal the methods of mass murder and assist in treason are quite effective at promoting the explanatory or independently evidenced truths I share.

 

[Fizz]

I appreciate the personal promotion but your unsubstantiated efforts to conceal the methods of mass murder and assist in treason are quite effective at promoting the explanatory or independently evidenced truths I share.

 

[DiveCon]

So where is this case now?

Not sure a clear answer can be made for that.

The most comprehensive answer is that the judges have rejected their official duty and made that duty ours to prosecute in civil court.

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

 

[Fizz]

So where is this case now?

Not sure a clear answer can be made for that.

The most comprehensive answer is that the judges have rejected their official duty and made that duty ours to prosecute in civil court.

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

let me guess here at what the judge really said...... since chrissy obviously has trouble interpreting how many fingers are on his hand when he holds it in front of his face.

the judge did his duty by looking at chrissy's claims. he found them to have no basis in reality. he told chrissy if he wants to pursue it then he needs to do it in civil court because there is no treason and chrissy is full of shit.

 

[Christophera]

So where is this case now?

Not sure a clear answer can be made for that.

The most comprehensive answer is that the judges have rejected their official duty and made that duty ours to prosecute in civil court.

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

Hmmm, the judge that said to me, "You need to find an attorney to prosecute your case" (Against the county), must have known what the county had done was criminal.

 

[Fizz]

Not sure a clear answer can be made for that.

The most comprehensive answer is that the judges have rejected their official duty and made that duty ours to prosecute in civil court.

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

Hmmm, the judge that said to me, "You need to find an attorney to prosecute your case" (Against the county), must have known what the county had done was criminal.

no. he must know what an incompetent dipshit you are,

 

[Liability]

Actually, the term "prosecute" has a special meaning in the law. Normally, one thinks of prosecuting a criminal or a criminal case.

But if a civil action is commenced, the plaintiff is the one with the responsibility to move the case forward. You cannot just file the complaint and then ignore the action. After a period of time, the civil defendant can (depending on the jurisdiction and rules) move to get the civil action dismissed. The terminology is "failure to prosecute." In that sense, it refers to the failure of the plaintiff to take the necessary legal actions to move the case forward within some allotted period of time.

Generally, see: dismissal legal definition of dismissal. dismissal synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

 

[DiveCon]

Actually, the term "prosecute" has a special meaning in the law. Normally, one thinks of prosecuting a criminal or a criminal case.

But if a civil action is commenced, the plaintiff is the one with the responsibility to move the case forward. You cannot just file the complaint and then ignore the action. After a period of time, the civil defendant can (depending on the jurisdiction and rules) move to get the civil action dismissed. The terminology is "failure to prosecute." In that sense, it refers to the failure of the plaintiff to take the necessary legal actions to move the case forward within some allotted period of time.

Generally, see: dismissal legal definition of dismissal. dismissal synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

ah, so its not like prosecuting a criminal offense

thanks for the info

 

[DiveCon]

Not sure a clear answer can be made for that.

The most comprehensive answer is that the judges have rejected their official duty and made that duty ours to prosecute in civil court.

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

Hmmm, the judge that said to me, "You need to find an attorney to prosecute your case" (Against the county), must have known what the county had done was criminal.

he was telling you to get a LAWYER, dipshit
but then, no lawyer would take your case because it is WORTHLESS
like YOU

 

[Liability]

dipshit, YOU don't prosecute in CIVIL court

Hmmm, the judge that said to me, "You need to find an attorney to prosecute your case" (Against the county), must have known what the county had done was criminal.

he was telling you to get a LAWYER, dipshit
but then, no lawyer would take your case because it is WORTHLESS
like YOU

Right. And in this particular "case" (it's not really a "case" at all, but for want of a better term, at the moment, let's just pretend that it is a "case"), there is nothing left to do.

The citizen who thinks that someone has committed "treason" has gone ahead and reported it to one of the officials referenced in the particular provision of law which spells out the obligation to expose "treason."

The fact that there never was any "treason" in the first place is beside the point. The dishonest imbecile, CriscoFEARa, pretending to see some "treason," did what would be his duty if there were any actual treason to report.

The authorities may take a quick peek at whatever he has to say. It's nothing worthy of serious contemplation as all the rest of us (not counting brain dead Troofers) can plainly see and as we have made clear.

Thus the authorities will act accordingly. That is, they will do nothing more with CriscoFEARa's imbecility.

The "case" itself is not subject to any disposition. It was a completed thing upon "filing" such as that filing was. The balance of whatever it is that CriscoFEARa is blathering about is his misbegotten and erroneous belief that he has any claim to compel the judge to act or the FBI to act. He doesn't, of course. There's not a thing for them to do after assessing his drivel and deciding that he's just an absurd joke as is his "report" of misprision of treason.

The important point is that there is not now and never was any valid evidence of "treason" stemming from the attack on us by the Islamoshitheads on 9/11/2001.

 

[Christophera]

Why does the BBC think there was a concrete core?

Even tho it is the wrong concrete core, obvious because there is no room for elevators.

 

[DiveCon]

Why does the BBC think there was a concrete core?

Even tho it is the wrong concrete core, obvious because there is no room for elevators.

it was an early report, and it was WRONG
why they dont take their errors off the web, i have no idea

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Why does the BBC think there was a concrete core?

Even tho it is the wrong concrete core, obvious because there is no room for elevators.

And another quick change of subject when proved stupid.

 

[Fizz]

Why does the BBC think there was a concrete core?

Even tho it is the wrong concrete core, obvious because there is no room for elevators.

even your own article that you got that from says it was a STEEL CORE you fucking moron!!!

"But the towers' ultimate collapse was inevitable, as the steel cores inside them reached temperatures of 800C - raising questions as to why hundreds of rescue workers were sent into the doomed buildings to their deaths. " BBC News | AMERICAS | How the World Trade Center fell

you are one of the biggest jackasses ever.....

 

[Christophera]

Why haven't you posted an image of the supposed steel cores in the the core area on 9-11?

 

[Liability]

Why haven't you posted an image of the supposed steel cores in the the core area on 9-11?

Because you, NULL POSTER, keep posting the images of the steel core, yourself; but you lie and claim they show concrete which they clearly don't show.

 

[Fizz]

Why haven't you posted an image of the supposed steel cores in the the core area on 9-11?

been posted many times already.
nice try at changing the subject when you are proven wrong once again.

null post.

 

[Christophera]

Since the only core that can be shown on 9-11 appears to be concrete,

your words must be wrong.