Protestors retreat with your Protests of internal
anger against who the majority people have chosen as our President (POTUS).
We need to allow the
authority head over our proud U.S.A. Nation, "TRUMP" to lead and
be given a sliver of chance in leading, so we can move our Country forward! Aren't you even aware, that when we act divided rather than united, those Terrorist moles that live among us, we subject ourselves with vulnerability for being attacked by Foreign Terrorist or Domestic Homeland Terroist?
Protestors, I urge you to Retreat, if you in fact define yourself
as a "True American."
Now, let's all take-up
the cause, to begin societal healing as American People united as one Nation under God.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a
nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
Palmdale Water District where is the $16.1 Million dollars you already received for the Littlerock Dam Project in year 1993?
Alisha Semchuck, Valley
Press Staff Writer, what a marvelous article you did, dated June 12, 2017 and titled:
Rec area’s closure addressed.
I want to
remind the readers of one particular quote by Dennis LaMoreaux within your
article when he said: “…It will cost water district customers between $600,000
and $700,000 a year “to haul that stuff out.”…
Simple question to the Palmdale Water
District – Where is the $16.1 Million dollars you already received from the
Palmdale Water District Customers, back in year 1993?
according to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) - Palmdale Water
District received $16.1 Million, in 1993 for Littlerock Dam Project.
Certificates of Participation (Bonds) already caused a debt against
Palmdale Water District Customers in 1993 to fund the Littlerock Dam
Project, with Parcel Taxation levies against commercial and residential
question to the #Palmdale #Water District (PWD) – What causes (PWD) to believe you
can charge Palmdale Water District Customers (Taxpayers) a second time in year
2017, for the same Littlerock Dam Project of 1993, you already received
Click on the
below Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) Link to view evidence, that
the Palmdale Water District has already been paid once in the amount ($16.1 Million)
in 1993, for the same project now of 2017:
Do you smell
“Political Fishiness” against Palmdale City Mayor Ledford?
political fishiness, smells like James Ledford / City of Palmdale is under a
subliminal political hit job, by someone or some person[s], who would just love
to take over our awesome City of Palmdale!
point, it is so important, that each and every person within the
City of Palmdale, show support towards our City of Palmdale and James Ledford,
because every person is innocent until proven guilty.
when political hit jobs happens, the "evildoers" try and make it appear
through various news media outlets (including fake news media outlets), that
you are guilty from the onset. However, it is the other way around that one is
always innocent until proven guilty by a court of law and GOD!
Last time I
checked, James Ledford and others have not been stripped of their Citizenship
as Americans and deserve to be treated with equal protection and due processes.
hand-to-hand with James Ledford, because Ledford does not deserve to be treated
like a criminal, when the purported matter at issue, has not even worked its
way through a court of law.
above said, it is a dam shame that someone or some persons are trying to use
their political influences within the County DA, in attempts to try and destroy
a person (James Ledford) and our City, due to grid, in attempts to try and take
over our proud City of Palmdale!
Ledford you have been added to a "Prayer List," because many of your Supporters hope you will not have to
suffer long, with wearing the Shoes of Injustice!”
is challenging her disbarment before the Federal U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals against California State Supreme Court and State Bar of California.
In 1986, Barry argued the first sexual harassment case in U. S. Supreme
Court, Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson,
477 U.S. 57 (1986) in which Justice Rehnquist writing for unanimous court held
that environmental harassment like quid pro quo harassment is gender
discrimination. Barry also won Vinson v.
Taylor, 753 F.2d 141 (D.C. Cir. 1985) which was the case challenged in the
Supreme Court sub nomine Meritor.
Historically, April 11, 2017, Tuesday, at 2:30pm Commissioner Peter Shaw of the
U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in Courtroom 2, at 95 Seventh St, San
Francisco will conduct a hearing as to whether Patricia Barry, Women’s / Civil
Rights Attorney should be disbarred from practice in the Federal Ninth Circuit Court,
based on disbarment by the California Supreme Court, initiated by the State Bar
of California.Barry was admitted to the Ninth Circuit Bar in June 1985. Barry
had practiced for 41-1/2 years in both state and federal court when the Court
According to Barry, in each of the three cases on which the disbarment is
based Barry represented a domestic violence victim trying to regain custody of
her child(ren) from the abuser, Carol Mardeusz in July 2000; Darla Elwood in
2002 through 2006; Michele Fotinos, 2010 to the present time.
In the Marduesz case the complaining witness was Marin judge Verna Adams,
who found Barry in contempt in July 2000 in part because she objected to the
prosecutor’s badgering of Mardeusz stating truthfully that Mardeusz was a
victim ofdomesticviolence.WhenBarrystatedthatMardeuszwasavictimofdomestic violence Judge
Adams immediately ordered the bailiff to place Barry in a holding cell in front of thejury.
Barry also went on to say the following, “that in the Elwood case, the
complaining witness was Joseph Morin, the father of two of Elwood’s children,
whom Barry had sued. He is a child batterer (there are declarations from
Elwood’s two older children who described his abuse).
Morin also engaged in racial violence (settled the case for a substantial
amount of money) and in addition, threatened to kill a woman who he believed
was a lesbian (she was) (she had obtained a two year restraining order against
him based in part on his death threats against her).
In the Fotinos case, the bar witness is Betsy Kimball who defended a San
Mateo attorney Stephen Montalvo whom Barry was suing because he committed gross
malpractice and fraud against Fotinos. In 2012 when Barry served Montalvo with
the legal malpractice/fraud complaint, the Bar appointed Kimball to the legal
malpractice insurance committee.
Montalvo took $70,000 from Fotinos and left her with no kids, no
community property, and $67 a month in child support. Barry had not paid $4,275
in discovery sanctions to him and $1,500 to the Court because Fotinos had no
money to pay attorney fees to Barry. The Bar prosecutor found that Barry lacked
the funds to pay the attorney and the Court the sanctions.
The judge entered a
judgment in the Montalvo lawsuit which did not include the sanctions orders.Nonpayment of discovery and judicial
sanctions, although not included in the judgment, is the primary reason the Bar
On April 11, 2017, Patricia Barry must prove (1) a deprivation of due
process; (2) insufficient proof of misconduct; or (3) grave injustice which
would result from the imposition of such discipline.
Unfortunately throughout our nation, attorneys are now coming under
attack by Bar Associations who are interfering with Constitutional Rights (Freedom
of Speech), which also applies to attorneys when they defend in court pleadings
vigorously for their clients.
Thus, without Barry to defend the defenseless in both Federal and State
courts our country will become a darker place!
For media inquiries contact Star Moffatt, Spokeswoman Moffatt Law Firm –
Tags: #State Bar of California, #Patricia Barry, #Ninth Circuit Court, #Disbar, #Freedom of Speech, #Deprivation, #Civil Rights.