CNN TV SCHEDULE ANCHORS & REPORTERS CONTACT US HLN

November 27, 2009

Tonight on Larry King Live!

Posted: 01:36 PM ET

Superstar Mariah Carey! 

Tune in for Larry’s one-on-one interview with the chart-topping singer and actress as they discuss her fame, new marriage and new album.

Are kids in Mariah’s future?  Tune in to find out…

That’s tonight at 9pm ET / 6pm PT!

Plus...

Shakira Shakes It!

The pop superstar joins Larry.  These hips don't lie.

And....

It’s “Black Friday” - the biggest and busiest shopping day of the year.  So we want to know:

ARE YOU SPENDING THE DAY SHOPPING FOR DEALS...OR RELAXING AT HOME?

Let us know below!

Filed under: Larry King Live


Share this on:
peter   November 27th, 2009 2:25 pm ET

LOVE her & happy she is finally HAPPY !...


Dodie   November 27th, 2009 2:52 pm ET

I just heard that CNN will be doing a story on the molesting of children for decades by the Catholic church in "Ireland"

Silence, repression, and prevarication are used knowingly to conceal truth from the people. The sexual predation and treacherous acts to children are perpetuated; generation after generation only ending when society is forced to see the horrendous atrocities in such a way there can be no denial, no excuses, and no rationalization!!!

Thank you CNN for making even more public, the Heinous atrocities to children in the name of religion!!!


John H.   November 27th, 2009 7:31 pm ET

@silent bear...I have not heard of Leonard Peltier or his case. Peltier sounds French. Does he also have a French Ancestry? What is he in prison for? At 65 years old, he is 2 years younger than myself and if he is in ill health, he may not have too many years left to him. Unless he did something really terrible, I would favor letting him free so he can have some peace and happiness in what is left of his life.


oreste   November 27th, 2009 8:35 pm ET

Pres. Obama is too good..not tough enough.."too good is no good"..doesn't pay to be a nice guy & try to please all US citizens ...Pres Harry Truman was tough ...


Bill Perry   November 27th, 2009 8:47 pm ET

I like Mariah, not question she can sing. But her comment about "Elvis", was a little out of taste. First of all Elvis Never had to take it off to make it, and he never had to have implants to do it, And maybe she had more number one hits, but she has not sold more records than him. But one thing for sure, she was floating the entire interview. I liked her better when she kept it on, and was not so "black".. (music style)


Keith   November 27th, 2009 10:38 pm ET

I don't like her. I'm turning off Larry and going out. Take a hike.


Alice Everitt   November 27th, 2009 10:49 pm ET

I AGREE WITH KEITH (ABOVE)! MARIAH CAREY IS THE MOST BORING GUEST YOU HAVE EVER HAD ON THE SHOW. I'M TURNING YOU OFF NOW.


Gary   November 27th, 2009 11:13 pm ET

Is there any way
that i can access the shakira part of the show online?
on cnn.com or youtube maybe?

thanks


colleen ackerman   November 28th, 2009 1:49 am ET

I was so excited she has faith tell her to not be shy about it. that will take her far


DARRIN FROM USA   November 28th, 2009 6:52 pm ET

I WISH HER WELL AND HOPE SHE HAS A HAPPY LIFE. ONE THING I REMEMBER ABOUT MARIAH IS THAT SHE DID A REMAKE OF 'I'LL BE THERE' ORIGINALLY SUNG BY THE LATE AND GREAT MICHAEL JACKSON. I THOUGHT SHE DID A GOOD JOB WITH THE SONG.


MULTITRILLIONAIRE-TRILSEN   November 29th, 2009 12:16 pm ET

TRILLIONAIRE GAVE NOTICE OF APPEAL TODAY TO US DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

US DISTRICT COURT–CIVIL DOCKET CASE #: 1:09-CV-0240-UNA
IN FILING IN REGARDS THE RELEASE OF MONIES FROM THE US TREASURY
AND HIS VEHICLE . WHITE HOUSE COULD FACE THE FOLLOWING WITH
NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAW. IT IS ONLY A CIVIL PROCEEDING
AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW

TONY CURTIS BARRINO
MULTRILLIONAIRE
TRILSEN

-----------------------------------

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Columbia

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff:

TONY CURTIS BARRINO
3304 Kenilworth Ave.
Hyattsville, Maryland 20781

VS.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WHITE HOUSE ADMINISTRATION
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20500

defendants:

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON
PRESS SECRETARY ROBERT GIBB

Plaintiff: Tony Curtis Barrino
3304 Kenilworth Ave.
Hyattsville, MD 20781
301-277-7878
___________________________________________________________

defendants
Presidentof the United States of America
BARACK OBAMA

Secretary of State
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

Press Secretary
ROBERT GIBB

COMPLAINT OF THE FOLLOWING COUNTS:
"UNDER COLOR OF OFFICE"

8–CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
TITLE 1

PART I–CRIMES

CHAPTER 95–RACKETEERING

Sec. 1959. Violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity

(a) Whoever, as consideration for the receipt of, or as
consideration for a promise or agreement to pay, anything of pecuniary value from an enterprise engaged in racketeering activity, or for the purpose of gaining entrance to or maintaining or increasing position in an enterprise engaged in racketeering activity, murders, kidnaps, maims, assaults with a dangerous weapon, commits assault resulting in serious
bodily injury upon, or threatens to commit a crime of violence against
any individual in violation of the laws of any State or the United
States, or attempts or conspires so to do, shall be punished–
(1) for murder, by death or life imprisonment, or a fine under
this title, or both; and for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any
term of years or for life, or a fine under this title, or both;
(2) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than thirty years
or a fine under this title, or both;
(3) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in
serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than twenty
years or a fine under this title, or both;
(4) for threatening to commit a crime of violence, by
imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine under this
title, or both;
(5) for attempting or conspiring to commit murder or kidnapping,
by imprisonment for not more than ten years or a fine under this
title, or both; and
(6) for attempting or conspiring to commit a crime involving
maiming, assault with a dangerous weapon, or assault resulting in
serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than three years
or a fine of \1\ under this title, or both.
-------------------------
\1\ So in original. The word "of" probably should not appear.

(b) As used in this section–
(1) "racketeering activity" has the meaning set forth in
section 1961 of this title; and
(2) "enterprise" includes any partnership, corporation,
association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of
individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity, which is
engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign
commerce.

-----------------------------------

2403

Hobbs Act—Extortion By Force, Violence, or Fear

In order to prove a violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, the following questions must be answered affirmatively:
Did the defendant induce or attempt to induce the victim to give up property or property rights?
"Property" has been held to be "any valuable right considered as a source of wealth." United States v. Tropiano, 418 F.2d 1069, 1075 (2d Cir. 1969) (the right to solicit garbage collection customers). "Property" includes the right of commercial victims to conduct their businesses. See United States v. Zemek, 634 F.3d 1159, 1174 (9th Cir. 1980) (the right to make business decisions and to solicit business free from wrongful coercion) and cited cases). It also includes the statutory right of union members to democratically participate in union affairs. See United States v. Debs, 949 F.2d 199, 201 (6th Cir. 1991) (the right to support candidates for union office); United States v. Teamsters Local 560, 550 F. Supp. 511, 513-14 (D.N.J. 1982), aff'd, 780 F.2d 267 (3rd Cir. 1985) (rights guaranteed union members by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 411).
Did the defendant use or attempt to use the victim's reasonable fear of physical injury or economic harm in order to induce the victim's consent to give up property?
A defendant need not create the fear of injury or harm which he exploits to induce the victim to give up property. SeeUnited States v. Duhon, 565 F.2d 345, 349 and 351 (5th Cir. 1978) (offer by employer to pay union official for labor peace held to be "simply planning for inevitable demand for money" by the union official under the circumstances); United States v. Gigante, 39 F.3d 42, 49 (2d Cir. 1994), vacated on other grounds and superseded in part on denial of reh'g, 94 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 1996) (causing some businesses to refuse operations with the victim sufficiently induced the victim's consent to give up property, consisting of a right to contract freely with other businesses, as long as there were other businesses beyond defendants' control with whom the victim could do business).
Moreover, attempted extortion may include an attempt to instill fear in a federal agent conducting a covert investigation or a defendant "made of unusually stern stuff." See United States v. Gambino, 566 F.2d 414, 419 (2d Cir. 1977) (argument that FBI agent pretending to be extortion victim could not be placed in fear is not a defense to attempted extortion of the agent); see also United States v. Ward, 914 F.2d 1340, 1347 (9th Cir. 1990) (an attempt to instill fear included a demand for money from a victim who knew that the defendant was only pretending to be a federal undercover agent when he threatened the victim with prosecution unless money was paid).
However, the payment of money in response to a commercial bribe solicitation, that is, under circumstances where the defendant does not threaten the victim with economic harm, but only offers economic assistance in return for payment to which the defendant is not entitled, is not sufficient to prove extortion by fear of economic loss. United States v. Capo, 817 F.2d 947, 951-52 (2d Cir. 1987) (solicitation of money from job applicants by persons having no decisionmaking authority in return for favorable influence with employment counselors was insufficient evidence of inducement by fear);but see United States v. Blanton, 793 F.2d 1553, 1558 (11th Cir. 1986) (inducement by fear was proven by the defendant's solicitation of a labor consulting contract, to help employer stop outside union organizing, when the solicitation was accompanied by defendant's threat to form another union and begin organizing employees if the consulting contract was not accepted).
Did the defendant's conduct actually or potentially obstruct, delay, or affect interstate or foreign commerce in any (realistic) way or degree?
The Hobbs Act regulates extortion and robbery, which Congress has determined have a substantial effect on interstate and foreign commerce by reason of their repetition and aggregate effect on the economy. Therefore, the proscribed offenses fall within the category of crimes based on the Commerce Clause whose "de minimis character of individual instances arising under [the] statute is of no consequence." United States v. Bolton, 68 F.3d 396, 399 (10th Cir. 1995) (upholding Hobbs Act convictions for robberies whose proceeds the defendant would have used to purchase products in interstate commerce), quoting, United States v. Lopez, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 1624, 1630 (1995); material in brackets added; see also United States v. Atcheson, 94 F.3d 1237, 1243 (9th Cir. 1996) (robbery of out-of-state credit and ATM cards); United States v. Farmer, 73 F.3d 836, 843 (8th Cir. 1996) (robbery of commercial business); United States v. Stillo, 57 F.3d 553, 558 n.2 (7th Cir. 1995).
Hobbs Act violations may be supported by proof of a direct effect on the channels or instrumentalities of interstate or foreign commerce, as for example, where the threatened conduct would result in the interruption of the interstate movement of goods or labor. See United States v. Taylor, 92 F.3d 1313, 1333 (2d Cir. 1996) (extortion of money, unwanted labor, and subcontracts on construction projects by threatened shutdowns and labor unrest); United States v. Hanigan, 681 F.2d 1127, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 1982) (robbery of three undocumented alien farm workers while they were traveling from Mexico to the United States in search of work); United States v. Capo, 791 F.2d 1054, 1067-68 (2d Cir. 1986), vacated on other grounds, 817 F.2d 947 (2d Cir. 1987) (scheme to extort local job applicants had a potential effect on interstate applicants who might otherwise be hired).
Indirect effects on such commerce are also sufficient, as for example, where the obtaining of property and resulting depletion of the victim's assets decreases the victim's ability to make future expenditures for items in interstate commerce.
Taylor, supra (depletion of contractors' assets). However, the Seventh Circuit has distinguished Hobbs Act cases involving depletion of a business' assets from those involving the depletion of an individual employee's assets which, the court has ruled, are not as likely to satisfy the jurisdictional requirement of the Hobbs Act. United States v. Mattson, 671 F.2d 1020 (7th Cir. 1982); United States v. Boulahanis, 677 F.2d 586, 590 (7th Cir. 1982). Other circuits have agreed where the extortion or robbery of an individual has only an "attenuated" or "speculative" effect on some entity or group of individuals engaged in interstate commerce thereby diminishing the "realistic probability" that such commerce will be affected. See United States v. Collins, 40 F.3d 95, 100 (5th Cir. 1994) (conviction for robbery of a computer company employee reversed on grounds that theft of victim's automobile with cellular phone had an insufficient effect on his employer's business); United States v. Quigley, 53 F.3d 909 (8th Cir. 1995) (upholding the acquittal, following guilty verdict, of defendants who beat and robbed two individuals in route to buy beer at a liquor store).
Was the defendant's actual or threatened use of force, violence or fear wrongful?
Generally, the extortionate obtaining of property by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force or violence in a commercial dispute requires proof of a defendant's intent to induce the victim to give up property. No additional proof is required that the defendant was not entitled to such property or that he knew he had no claim to the property which he sought to obtain. See United States v. Agnes, 581 F.Supp. 462 (E.D. Pa. 1984), aff'd, 753 F.2d 293, 297-300 (3d Cir. 1985) (rejecting claim of right defense to defendant's use of violence to withdraw property from a business partnership).
However, the Supreme Court has recognized a claim-of-right defense to Hobbs Act extortion in labor-management disputes.
In a 1973 decision, the Court reversed the conviction of union-member defendants who had used violence against an employer's property, during an otherwise legitimate economic labor strike, in order "to achieve legitimate union objectives, such as higher wages in return for genuine services which the employer seeks." United States v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396, 400 (1973). The Court reasoned that the legislative history of the Hobbs Act disclosed that Congress had been concerned with attempts by union officials to extort wages for unwanted and fictitious labor, to which employees were not entitled, as contrasted with the policing of legitimate labor strikes in general. Therefore, the Court concluded that the union members' use of violence during the strike was not "wrongful" for purposes of Hobbs Act extortion. The Supreme Court also made a broadly worded statement that
"wrongful" has meaning in the Act only if it limits the statute's coverage to those instances where the obtaining of the property would itself be "wrongful" because the alleged extortionist has no lawful claim to that property.
Id.
--------------------------------------------
Extortion refers to obtaining property or compelling action by the use of threats or by the misuse of public office. The terms blackmail and extortion are often used interchangeably; yet in ordinary speech, they connote somewhat different behavior. Blackmail generally refers to hush money, and extortion refers to certain forms of public official misconduct and to those making threats of physical harm to person or property. Few "blackmail" statutes remain on the books, with most statutes prohibiting such behavior as extortion, theft, or criminal coercion.
Extortion is of two types: (1) extortion by threats or fear; and (2) extortion under color of office. Extortion by threats or fear (coercive extortion) can refer to any illegal use of a threat or fear to obtain property or advantages from another, short of violence, which would constitute robbery. Extortion offenses include not only threats obtaining property, but also those compelling any action against one's will (also called criminal coercion).
Statutes usually set out the kinds of threats that make up coercive extortion—for example, the threat to commit a crime, injure person or property, or expose a crime or contemptible information. The distinction traditionally drawn between robbery by intimidation and some forms of extortion is that a person commits robbery when he threatens to do immediate bodily harm, whereas he commits extortion when he plans to do bodily harm in the future. Historically, extortion under color of office is the seeking or receipt of a corrupt payment by a public official (or a pretended public official) because of his office or his ability to
__________________________________________________________________________________________
\
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Columbia

COMPLAINT

TONY CURTIS VS. WHITE HOUSE ADMINSTRATION
OPPRESSION

The offense, committed by a public official, of wrongfully inflicting injury, such as bodily harm or imprisonment, upon another individual under color of office.
Oppression, which is a misdemeanor, is committed through any act of cruelty, severity, unlawful exaction, or excessive use of authority.

PRESIDENT OBAMA STATED ON OPEN MEDIA "WE ARE CONDUCTING A PSYCOLOGICAL STRESSOR" ON TONY CURTIS BARRINO

PRESIDENT OBAMA STATED " HE WANTS TO REATAIN INHEIRTANCE IN THE TREASURY"

PRESIDENT USED TELECAST MEDIA AS A POLITICALLY COERCED/COERCIVE CONJECTURE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC RESPONSE WHICH IS CLEARLY A UNLAWFUL MEANS TO REATAIN/EXTORT.

ROBERT GIBB ON C-SPAN "WE DON'T LIKE THIS GUY, HE HAS OUT SMARTTED
US ON EVERYTHING"

ROBERT GIBB ON C-SPAN "WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING TO DERAIL THIS GUY"

HILLARY CLINTON ADMITTED ON TELEVISION "I HAVE COMMITED EXTORTION"
LAST WEEK CNN

HILLARY CLINTON STATED ON CNN "WE ARE GOING TO GIVE HIS MONEY NOW
AND SHOOT HIM LATER"

PRESIDENT STATED "WE ARE GOING TO INTRODUCE HIM TO THE LAND OF THE
POWERFUL"

PRESIDENT STATED "I WANT THIS GUY TO TASTE THE RIFLE AND THE THE BULLET TUMBLES"

PRESIDENT OBAMA STATES/ASK "HOW HARD IS IT TO GET ON PERSON KILLED"

ROBERT GIBB "WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE THIS GUY"

PRESIDENT OBAMA STATED "I DONT BELIEVE ANY SHOULD HAVE THIS MUCH MONEY"

PRESIDENT OBAMA "I DONT THIS GUY TO PERCEIVED AS A HERO"

MEMBERS MEDIA "WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE NOT AS POPULAR
AS OUR PRESIDENT"

US STATE DEPT. DEFAMATOUS SLANDEROUS INVESTIGATION THROUGH AS WELL MALICIOUS INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SKYNET

ETC. YOUR HONOR

op·pres·sion
• n. prolonged cruel or unjust treatment or control: a region shattered by oppression and killing.
∎ the state of being subject to such treatment or control. ∎ mental pressure or distress: her mood had initially been alarm and a sense of oppression.

Oppression under color of office.
1. An officer, or a person pretending to be an officer, who unlawfully and maliciously, under pretense or color of official authority:
(a) Arrests another or detains him against his will;
(b) Seizes or levies upon another’s property;
(c) Dispossesses another of any lands or tenements; or
(d) Does any act whereby another person is injured in his person, property or rights,
Ê commits oppression.
2. An officer or person committing oppression shall be punished:
(a) Where physical force or the immediate threat of physical force is used, for a category D felony as provided in .
(b) Where no physical force or immediate threat of physical force is used, for a gross misdemeanor.

Misconduct of public officer. Every public officer who:
1. Asks or receives, directly or indirectly, any compensation, gratuity or reward, or promise thereof, for omitting or deferring the performance of any official duty or for any official service which has not been actually rendered, except in case of charges for prospective costs or fees demandable in advance in a case allowed by law; or
2. Employs or uses any person, money or property under his official control or direction, or in his official custody, for the private benefit or gain of himself or another,
Ê is guilty of a category E felony and shall be punished

extortion refers to obtaining property or compelling action by the use of threats or by the misuse of public office. The terms blackmail and extortion are often used interchangeably; yet in ordinary speech, they connote somewhat different behavior. Blackmail generally refers to hush money, and extortion refers to certain forms of public official misconduct and to those making threats of physical harm to person or property. Few "blackmail" statutes remain on the books, with most statutes prohibiting such behavior as extortion, theft, or criminal coercion.

Extortion is of two types: (1) extortion by threats or fear; and (2) extortion under color of office. Extortion by threats or fear (coercive extortion) can refer to any illegal use of a threat or fear to obtain property or advantages from another, short of violence, which would constitute robbery. Extortion offenses include not only threats obtaining property, but also those compelling any action against one's will (also called criminal coercion).
Statutes usually set out the kinds of threats that make up coercive extortion—for example, the threat to commit a crime, injure person or property, or expose a crime or contemptible information. The distinction traditionally drawn between robbery by intimidation and some forms of extortion is that a person commits robbery when he threatens to do immediate bodily harm, whereas he commits extortion when he plans to do bodily harm in the future. Historically, extortion under color of office is the seeking or receipt of a corrupt payment by a public official (or a pretended public official) because of his office or his ability to

In order to prove a violation of Hobbs Act extortion by the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, the following questions must be answered affirmatively:
Did the defendant induce or attempt to induce the victim to give up property or property rights?
"Property" has been held to be "any valuable right considered as a source of wealth." United States v. Tropiano, 418 F.2d 1069, 1075 (2d Cir. 1969) (the right to solicit garbage collection customers). "Property" includes the right of commercial victims to conduct their businesses. See United States v. Zemek, 634 F.3d 1159, 1174 (9th Cir. 1980) (the right to make business decisions and to solicit business free from wrongful coercion) and cited cases). It also includes the statutory right of union members to democratically participate in union affairs. See United States v. Debs, 949 F.2d 199, 201 (6th Cir. 1991) (the right to support candidates for union office);United States v. Teamsters Local 560, 550 F. Supp. 511, 513-14 (D.N.J. 1982), aff'd, 780 F.2d 267 (3rd Cir. 1985) (rights guaranteed union members by the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. § 411).

Plaintiff: Tony Curtis Barrino
3304 Kenilworth Ave.
Hyattsville, MD 20781
301-277-7878


MULTITRILLIONAIRE-TRILSEN   November 29th, 2009 12:26 pm ET

Date: Sunday, November 29, 2009, 4:05 PM

JUST SO YOU KNOW WITH THIS SPYWEAR/MOLE ON ME I DO NOT HAVE FULL PRIVACY WITH ATTTORNEY – CLIENT I SPOKE TO VIEUX BACK IN THE SUMMER HE
IS FULLY AWARE OF EVERYTHING AND THIS MONITORING WITH SKYNET...JUST BE AWARE HE AND SENIOR COUNSEL AT BLANK ROME HAVE WATCHING THIS HOL SITUATION DEVELOPE WE WERE HOPOING IT WAS JUST "OVERREACTING AND IMPATIENCE ON MY PART WE SEE THAT IT IS NOT THERE IS TON OF VIDEO FOOTAGE AND WE HAVE 50 PAGES OF CASE NOTES

I WANT TO KNOW WHY THE RUSSIAN PRIME MINISTER IS UPSET LAST I SAW RUAAIAN PRIME MINISTER SIT "DOWN " WITH MEN AT THE TABLE HE SAID "YOU PUSHED POWER ON HIM"....MEDIATION IS THE CORRECT THING TO DO WHEN THERE IS ISSUE RUSSIA AINT GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT GOES OVER HERE
I DONT KNOW WHAT GOING ON IN THERE COUNTRY....

I HEARD THE PRESIDENT MAKE MENTION THEY SHOOT DRUG ADDICTS....

GUESS WHAT RUSSIA DIDNT COME TO HIS RESUCE....THEY DIDNT/ DONT HAVE ANY PALNS FOR AMERICA AT ALL.

DRUGS IN AMERICA HAVE BEEN SINCE THE COWBOY DAYS YOU COULD BUY
SNAKE OIL STRAIGHT HEROIN IN A BOTTLE

THE INDIANS SMOKED MARIJUANA ...THE INDIAN HEMP PLANT

THIS SPYWEAR WILL TELL YOU I THAT DID NOT STEAL ON PILL OR NARCOTIC PILL
IN FOURTEEN YEARS AS NURSE ...AND READING MY THINKING ON THIS NOR DID
THINK OF HURTING OR IGNORING/NEGLECTING THE CARE OF MY PATIENTS I CARED FOR /UNDER MY DIRECT DAILY CARE......NO ON THE JOB MISCONDUCT
AND KROONS THEY DO BACKGROUND CHECKS. IS OWNED BY A CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENT...TRUST I LL BET YOU THEY KNOW WHO I AM...A NURSE WITH SPYWEAR ...ITHEY DO CHECKS FOR ALOT OF MEDIAL CARE FACILTIES...

YOU CANT HIDE YOUR BACKGROUND I HAVE RIGHT APPROACH/PROGRAM AND EXPLAINATION/ MILITARY NURSE TRAINING RESUME THAT IS OUTSTANDING...

ALSO I GOT IN THE MILITARY WITH A FELONY FOR 6.5 YEARS .i got in trouble while i was on delayed entry in college then just active duty...the judge gave community service because i was delayed entry.. i got security clearance top secret .i had one for real..AND MADE IT TO THE
RANK OF SERGENTE-5 IN JUST IN THREE YEARS....I WAS MEDICAL SUPPLY
SPECIALIST AS EXTRA DUTY I HAD 500,000 WORTH MEDICAL SUPPLIES, QUARTERLY BUDGET MANAGEMENT, AND TWO WALL LOCKER FULL OF DRUGS
FROM VICODIN MORPHINE ATROPINE DARVOCET–I COULD ORDER THOSE DRUGS...GUESS WHAT I GOT SPY WEAR THAT SAYS I NEVER TOUCH ANY OF THAT MEDICATION OR SUPPLIES OR US THEM

PLUS I HELD A TRADE FOR FOURTEEN YEARS AS NURSE MILITARY TRAINED

IM TIRED OF PEOPLE/[RESIENT TALKING ABOUT MY RECORD I CANT GET A JOB AT
McDONALD'S WHICH IS TOTAL LIE...I GOT TWO FEDERAL JOBS AND STILL ELIGIBLE CONSIDERING MY SKILL LEVEL JUST LIKE MY RECORD
IS I DID THAT ...PEOPLE DONT KNOW THAT YOU CAN GET A FEDERAL JOB WITH WITH A FELONY...YOUR DISQUALIFIED FROM SOME JOBS NOT ALL FEDERAL JOBS...

MEDIAL PERSON WITH SPYWEAR AND NO ON THE JOB MISCONDUCT SAYS THAT PEOPLE CAN BE TRUSTED WITH A CRIMINAL RECORD..WHAT THEY DO ON THIER OFF TIME IS THE ISSUE OR QUESTIONABLE.

NOW ENCOMPASSING ALL THIS THERE IS NO EMPLOYMENT EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION STANDARD LAW GUIDE LINES ON BACKGROUND CHECKS...
GIVEN THIS SITUATION I REALLY WOULD OUT THAT POINT...

BECAUSE MEN TRY TO GET BACK ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND PEOPLE HOLD THEIR PAST AGAINST FOREVER....OR MAKE LIGHT OF...IN SOME SITUATION AND NATURE OF CRIME I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME POSITIONS THEY WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR

BUT HAVING THIS SPYWEAR ON MY BODY AND GOING THROUGH ISSUES WITH
BACKGROUND CHECKS THEN GOING THROUGH THIS WITH THE WHITE ADMINISTRATION...MAYBE WE AMERICA OUGHT TO ADDRESS THE THAT ISSUE
REGUALTION..BECAUSE I GOT A SECOND CHANCE..AN ATTEMPTED CLEAN SLATE /FAIR CHANCE BY THE BUSH ADMINSTRATION THWN HAVE ENDURE THIS TYPE
OPPRESSION FROM THIS ADMINISTRATION...

LOOKING AT ALL THIS I DONT GIVE DAMN WHO DONT LIKE ME ADDRESSING THIS SITUATION THROUGH MEDIATION OF THE US COURT OF APPEALS...CAUSE
I KNOW THEY JUST ARE GIVNG A HARD TIME UNNECESSARILY...THESE
SPYWEAR MAKES VERY SAFE PERSON AND FORKM THIRTY YEARS OF STUDY
LANGLEY KNOWS HOW I REALLY REALLY THINK...IF THEY THOUGHT ANYTHING
LESS ABOUT MAKE CAPABILITES AS A CULTURED PRODUCTIVE PERSON I WOULD NOT HAVE ROLL ROYCE THEY WOULD ENDED THE STUDY ALONG TIME AGO...

JUST KNOW BLANK AND ROME I HAVE WATCHED HEARD THIS WHOLE SITUATION DEVELOP SINCE THIS MID SUMMER...

..BELIEVE ME....WE HAVE BEEN WATCHING EVERY THING...I CANT EVEN TALK TO THEM WITH BEING OVER HEARD...I APPREICATE THE CONTROVERSY AND KNOW WE ARE READY TO GO FORWARD IF NEED BE....AINT NOTHING SLOW ABOUT ME

IN CLOSING WHEN DUBAI PRIME MINISTER WAS OVER IN EARLY MARCH OR FEBUARY WHEN I GOT THE STOCK MARKET TO TURN AROUND WITH CONDUIT
AND THEY WHERE SHOCKED ABOUT NOW THEY ALL OF A SUDDEN HAVE DEBT PROBLEMS...SEE THEY KNOW THAT WE CAN RESUCE OR ECONOMY ...I WONDER
HOW THEY KNOW SO IT WAS EASIER FOR THEM TO DO WHAT THEY DID BECAUSE..WE GOT MONEY TO FIX THE FALL OUT OF THEIR DELAY....

I AM YOUR BEST FRIEND OVER HERE...

I APP[RECIATE THE OF PLAY ME WITH SATELLITE GAME UNPOPULAR WITH THIS CONTREVERSIAL "BAD BOY" -THAT'S WORTHY...

WE READY

...THIS INTIMIDATION AND INVESTIGATION WAS UNDUE I KNEW THAT
THIS ADMINISTRATION WAS GOING TO TRY ME FROM DAY ONE....
AND WAS NOT GOING TO PLAY FAIR AND BE COOL ABOUT THE SITUATION

we been watching the media since this summer...believe me...watch who you tried to railroad with controversy.....and political posturing....there are laws for politiians that have
problems!!

watching the thing ...check the date

TRILSEN

I

- On Mon, 10/26/09, Tony Barrino wrote:

From: Tony Barrino
.
To: Vieux@BlankRome.com
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 5:19 PM


Paulette   November 29th, 2009 4:49 pm ET

Thank you for cancelling the interview with the White House Party crashers. The nerve of these people is something that has made my blood boil. How can they be that hungry for publicity that they would pull something like this and think its alright?

However, it should be a wake up call to President Obama regarding his security, I can't say they should be dismissed but I feel they should be reassigned to a detail that is not close to he or his family.


ckelly   November 30th, 2009 12:45 am ET

Ahh, the shadows...that's where we need to go...what was the Secret Service thinking or planning? Who knows?-If you follow the American president for the last weeks, the global complexities of the world are visible-clear

But back in America-its the same old song and dance-You have to love the fashion sense and of course the color......2009 trash?

Who are our created monsters?

The Vatican has long been hiding its sins, its hypocracy and allowing a small number of sick priests sanctuary, (remember there are over a million dedicated priests world wide)..to get away with terrible crimes against humanity...As long as the Catholic church refuses to accept real responsibility and make honest and rightful amends in its own- its own tragedy, the destruction of the innocents that it has sacrificed itself for to protect -the Church will continue to remain misunderstood, and an easy scapegoat for a multitude of global problems..

It is not crimes against children for the dramatic "sake of religion" but it is the crimes against the vulnerable "In spite" of the religious and spiritual, moral and ethical values it aspires to live and promote.

The anger is the rigidity in the focus of the hypocricy ,at the sexual abuse against children-However, the truth-the reality is that more than 90% of all children sexually abused are abused by family and people they know-neighbors, sporting coaches, babysitters etc-yet the religious clergy is both a legal and media focus-why? because lawyers can get money from institutions but not from the 90%-and then there is the "holy than thou let down"

But the truth is that it is easier to rage against the anonymous, the institutions and the "IDEA" than rage against the reality of who we are. There must always be demons in American culture -even among the non-religious. Black and White thinking.

We don't like to examine our own misuse of power, cruelty and need to be right-we don't like to look at our own mono-focused thinking..do we?

We all have to take responsibility of our selves. Its too easy to blame someone else. Yes the legal framework will make criminals pay-but what do we do when we tear down all our ancient institutions, history, culture and religion ?-What do the forceful avengers do then?

What are your own shadows?


Dodie   November 30th, 2009 3:29 am ET

@CKelly

to answer your statement:................"90% of all children sexually abused are abused by family and people they know-neighbors, sporting coaches, babysitters etc-yet the religious clergy is both a legal and media focus-why?"

------------------

Because, Priests have the "word of god" which places them at a level compared to none other.

Silence, repression, and prevarication are used knowingly to conceal truth from the people. The sexual predation and treacherous acts to children are perpetuated; generation after generation under the "word of god" only ending when society is finally forced to see the horrendous atrocities in such a way there can be.......

No denial...................
No excuses...................
No Justification .................
No rationalization!!!


Dodie   November 30th, 2009 2:26 pm ET

@ Ckelly

You stated to me: “You are actually a verbal bully..!! While I have been avoiding you-I have watched your posts over the last year and I saw how you went back to previous blogs and "danced" all over them, adding your opinion on another matte,r and now you are here again -looking for "something"
____________________________

(((Now you are resorting to personal attacks, name calling and falsifying statements I supposedly made? ))))

Is that all you have? I call that pathetic!

I have the right, just like you, to blog on. I have the right to answer your questions when you place them on the blog. I have defended other people when you were personally attacking them. This seems to be your strategy!

As I told you on the previous blog , the one you were whining to CNN that someone else was following you and posting conflicting views…. I told you then, to stop replying! You are the clinician, the psychotherapist of 20 years. You should know what to do. Why do you continue to play the “victim” card!!!
----------–
You stated : “The Catholic church is not responsible for the creation of rape and sexual abuse.”
---------–
I never implied the church was responsible for the “creation” of sexual abuse. I just stated a fact that the Catholic Church IS RESPONSIBLE for Priests who carry the “word of God” and continue to RAPE OUR CHILDREN! These are supposedly “HOLY MEN”

You are part of the problem. Because you continue to rationalize defending the Catholic Church, from the responsibility of this horrific sexual predation of children, this abuse will continue! I do not hate the church or religion. I want to STOP THIS ABUSE! And the only way it can be stopped is for the Church to take on the responsibility!!!

Ckelly, can you even imagine for a second out of your life… A boy, a child who completely trusts the priest with not only his life….but his soul. This boy looks up to the priest as second to “God” only to have the priest rape him. Do you have any idea, what that does to this child?

Besides the initial trauma that all children experience, this is a boy and the Priest is male. This type of sexual abuse will create within the boy, experiences of sexual identity crisis as now he wonders if he did something to initiate it and now wonders maybe he might have wanted it. Because child sexual predators are very good at moving the blame from them in to the child, the child will take on that blame. So now you not only have a child whose life has been shattered and is in utter chaos, you have a child wondering if he is straight or gay!

Do you have any idea how many men are carry this inside them their entire life???? Do you have any idea how many men live out their entire life in utter isolation emotionally because they just cannot come to grips that they could be gay?

Some men who have experienced this horrific act may end up becoming homophobic and project their rage on a person who is gay. Others go down silent degradation paths… they eventually get married and have children… but always carry the shame deep inside of them that continues to eat at them like a cancer. These priests not only ravaged their bodies, they ravaged their souls!

So CKelly, now you know! How many more boys have to grow up in quiet desperation feeling incredibly ashamed and unworthy???

How many more ckelly? How many more children with shattered lives will it take for the Catholic Church to assume responsibility and stop the abuse?


Comments have been closed for this article

Keep up to date with Larry

Follow him on Twitter

Become a fan on Facebook

Contact us
Go Behind The Scenes

Producer

LARRY KING LIVE'S Emmy-winning Senior Executive Producer Wendy Walker knows what it takes to make a great story.

With anecdotes, provocative emails, scandals, show transcripts and insights into Walker's long working relationship with Larry King, her new book PRODUCER issues readers an invitation to listen in on the most intriguing conversations on the planet.

Order from:
Amazon
Barnes & Noble
Borders


King of Hearts

Larry King's King of Hearts

Saving a heart a day is the goal! Learn more about the Foundation and it's efforts to help the uninsured

Visit the Larry King Cardiac Foundation.


subscribe RSS Icon
twitter
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP