"Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser on Friday called the lawsuit a “made up case” because Smith wasn’t offering wedding website services when the suit was filed."

 

18 U.S. Code § 1621 - Perjury generally

18 U.S. Code § 1622 - Subornation of perjury

18 U.S. Code § 1623 - False declarations before grand jury or court 

[ additionally of interest(?) ]

18 U.S. Code § 1349 - Attempt and conspiracy

18 U.S. Code § 287 - False, fictitious or fraudulent claims

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

18 U.S. Code § 1031 - Major fraud against the United States

 

"-witness tampering-" offered from barbara mcquade, the law professor, ~ ten minutes.

i find that an odd statement to make about an audio recording.  with or without the recording false representations before any court within america's jurisdiction would still be impermissible.  liability for words and actions isn't diminished by informing the public of concerns.

i could see not releasing materials that would be protected by the court under the law.  information that would identify personal information might not be available to the public in the interest of protecting the rights of a person or persons identified.  however, just claiming that evidence could be instrumental in purgerious testimony misses the subornation of that perjury and the subsequent commission of perjured testimony before witness tampering could involve a recording.  arguing that publicly released, recorded evidence was tantamount to subornation wouldn't merit more than misconsideration.  of more immediate interest, seeing an off the record interview published as the result of a prosecution might partially explain the necessity of a court case against a former President. 


 

 

"- conspire -" "-to defraud -" "-any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

failing to recognize a burden of evidence as requiring a grand jury or grand juries to consider whether charges should be brought and possibly then allowing a court or courts to determine if the burden of proof is strong enough to convict becomes a concern when faced with evidence of any crime as a government official.  if the crime is of fraud, perpetrated by government officials or people associated with our government, then the concern also becomes one of failing to be potentially complicit.

so... five gets you ten or?  good thing i'm not there?  probably wouldn't stop at ten or twenty once i got started.  am happy to not be involved.

 

 

 

 

clue

 

 

 

Gloria Visits The Writer's Guild Of America - Fargo S03E03

 

 

 

 

want to see something funny?  found this while looking for something else.  not sure if this is all that's left of their site because i didn't keep looking.  http://www.aftra.org/ sits there looking very much like the late 1990s.  seems abandoned if then already ten, fifteen years out of date.

[your "union" website looks mediocre for something from twenty to twenty-five years ago and i'm the mean one?  hope if you have a new web portal it looks better than the pages i put up for free.]

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ten-years-after-the-sag-aftra-merger-lessons-for-the-unions-future-1235121637/