By One Night in Bangkok Makes a Hard Man Humble
Hey Claviger,
I’m beginning to think you’re WRONG with regard to your assessment that Nancy — and possibly Lauren — have negotiated a set of mamma/daughter plea deals.
Why?
…Because after MONTHS of engaging in plea negotiations with Nancy Salzman, Moira Penza has come up with exactly SQUAT so far. That’s not normal. If an agreement was officially reached she’d have disclosed it already.
Also, it’s been MONTHS since Moira Penza first told the court that she expected Nancy to enter into a plea deal, yet she’s come up with exactly SQUAT so far.
Let’s not forget that Moira Penza also agreed to (i.e. failed to oppose) Allison Mack’s bail arrangements to let her out of jail when she got arrested, all because she expected a plea deal to be agreed to. Yet we all saw how that went. Penza FAILED miserably and Allison played her like a fool.
Let’s not forget that Moira Penza agreed to (i.e. failed to oppose) Allison Mack’s bail ‘adjustments’ to give her more leeway and freedom to go to school, yet that didn’t mean SQUAT with regard to Mack’s plea deal status.
Thus, it means NOTHING that Penza isn’t opposing Nancy’s motions for more freedom.
Also, unless a plea deal was already DONE and Lauren’s performance on the witness stand was locked-in as part of her deal terms, it means NOTHING that she made a motion to separate her trial. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Also, WHY hasn’t Nancy tried to separate her trial from Keith’s IF her own testimony is gonna be used to lessen her own punishment, just like Lauren’s?
Do you honestly think that Nancy was given FULL IMMUNITY but Lauren’s only being given a reduced sentence?
Not a chance. Nancy’s hands are 10 times dirtier than Lauren’s, Mr. Claviger.
I’m beginning to think that Mr. Claviger is like a Tarot Card Reader. He’s merely ‘seeing’ the potential outcome that he WANTS TO BELIEVE no matter what motions are filed or opposed.
I have no doubt that whatever motion gets filed next, Mr. Claviger will interpret that to mean Nancy is cooperating.
If a motion is filed to let Nancy go disco dancing on Tuesday evenings or acquire a pet monkey, Claviger will interpret that to mean a plea deal is done.
Penza is kinda ‘choking’ in the plea deal negotiations, so far.
How long does it take to secure just ONE fucking plea deal in a case with so many defendants?
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
[…] Editor’s note: This guest view comes from a critic of Dennis Burke and opines that Burke may be the author of the post Guest View: Nancy and Lauren Salzman have NOT made deals with Feds […]
[…] Editor’s note: This guest view comes from a critic of Dennis Burke and opines that Burke may be the author of the post Guest View: Nancy and Lauren Salzman have NOT made deals with Feds […]
To my many detractors… I get my kicks above the waistline, sunshine.
To everybody else:
The prosecutors need to be replaced IMO since they’re just not up to the task of securing plea deal witnesses in a timely manner. They’re kinda fucking up this case and Keith could go free if they don’t stop clowning around.
Agnifilo’s “Garden of Eden” (GOE) defense is gonna be the next Twinkie defense. It will be immortalized in legal history.
All future potential rape victims will be likened to Eve in the lush Garden of Eden, by gutless defense attorneys.
Can Penza stop him? Right now, she’s not giving me much confidence. She better stop this shitty performance.
Here a Burke, there a Burke, everywhere a Burke lurks. Frank Parlato had a blog, ey ay ee ay oh. On that blog there was a Burke, with a Clicky 8, here, and a Deez Nuts there, One Night In Bangkok, Dennis Burke shall in jail rot. Here a lurk, there a Burke…
“I can feel the devil walking next to me.”
Tampering with and manufacturing evidence and influencing, threatening witnesses. Brrrrrrr-yurrrrk-eeeee. SayI’msorry Samsara. It’s your Karma.
holy heck for real is he making fun of the prosecutor?
The prosecution doesn’t have to share its case until two weeks prior to the scheduled trial – if I’m remembering correctly – so the Salzmans may have turned and it’s still a work in progress. Perhaps that’s why Nancy isn’t required to attend proceedings even though she seems to be recovering.
Looks like today our favorite corrupt ex-prosecutor, Dennis Burke, has invented a new name for sending messages to FrankReport.
“Penza is kinda ‘choking’ in the plea deal negotiations, so far. How long does it take to secure just ONE fucking plea deal in a case with so many defendants?” writes the disgraced former U.S. Attorney, arrogantly reflecting on his clan’s history so far, as they’ve managed to use Clare Bronfman’s resources to hold together many of the defendants in concert while preventing them from entering in to plea deals.
Apparently the disgraced former U.S. Attorney has moved on from his old pseudonym of “DeezNuts” to a more creative name, “One Night in Bangkok Makes a Hard Man Humble”. Nice one, Dennis!
How’s the coordinated coercion and subtle or not-so-subtle intimidation of witnesses working out for you, Denny boy? Feeling a little pressure from Judge Garaufis these days, aren’t we?
Methinks that the creator of the first universal social media Internet platform in Mexico, computer whiz-kid, Jeff Peterson, might not be mistaken as to Bangkok’s and Deez’s, etc. identity.
Dennis Burke’s words — including the words of someone who may have had the opportunity to know something of my sister’s travels on a mission commissioned by KAR months before her death shared with her “killers” as “The Rat” attests to — along with Burke’s VPN or whatever geekly way Peterson has of knowing — smack of someone possibly in the midst of a desperately closing a plea deal on behalf of Lauren and Nancy Salzman. Of one bound to shame prosecutors into a mode of greater generosity over their failure to procure a single plea thus far.
Hurry Allison Mack, the bus is pulling out and your badass is squarely under the tires.
“And I’d you’re lucky then the God’s a SHE.”
Says the Torontonian with zero NXIVM or legal experience.
Hit a nerve, did we, Big D? Or just rationalizing your “easy win” scenarios again for the sake of making your current life conditions more bearable? If you’re talking about Peterson when you refer to “no legal experience,” his successful resolution in the past of over eighty civil matters, including several full jury trials and victories against firms such as Skadden, Arps, Latham & Watkins, and Brown & Bain, does not exactly equal “zero legal experience.” You have again shown how ill informed you are; and how quick you are to make assumptions tending to rationalize your own bullshit.
That ill-informed nature of yours is too bad for your clients and plentiful co-counsel who were somehow led to believe you’re a big shot, because certainly you couldn’t have been another Napolitano sycophant who only held appointed positions due to his willingness to do the dirty work, never once having been elected to an office…by the way, on the topic of “legal experience”, not many former U.S. Attorneys have one of these, do they, “Mr. Invisible.” How’s this for your “legal experience?”
http://www.dcbar.org/discipline/other_jurisdiction/20140411Burke.pdf
Hey Burke, did you and Sandweg really lie to the federal government, then try to invoke your former titles as departamental heads within Homeland Security and the DOJ as part of a scheme to aid M.F. and others within the NXIVM enterprise? Tisk, tisk. Document #256 is quite a read. Must be embarrassing for you while you’re not engaging in your constant self-rationalization of all things. Let’s hope everyone continues to buy your attempts to minimize the realities about you that are now staring them in the face. Get real, your lies have come back to haunt you again. Has it sunk in yet, in your self-rationalizing stubborn brain, that your supposedly privileged documents are likely being admitted in to evidence under the crime-fraud exception to the rules? Please don’t tell us you’re so far detached from reality that you need FrankReport commentary to remind you what that means as to the origin of those documents and the obvious intent of the representative author. Despite what you surely believe now that you’re empowered by dirty money, you are not invincible. Didn’t you learn anything from Fast and Furious? Or is all of this somehow connected? What a complicated web you have woven.
Look on the bright side, Dennis, you might not have to lie to Congress this time around. At least in NXIVM, Vanguard only thought he was a matter of national importance, and no one has to orchestrate the murder of a couple of border patrol officers to keep them quiet. This time, you only have to lie to Clare Bronfman and your abundant co-counsel, then throw all of them under the bus in order to protect your real “clients” in Mexico. As arrogant and clueless as Raniere is, and as professional as the high dollar lawyers you guys hired with Clare’s money are, makes sense how you’ve been able to bullshit him, and them, and makes even more sense you’d be the clean-up man orchestrating the whole mess. For as the years have shown, expertise in handling and cleaning up other people’s crap while pushing underhanded deceitful agendas on his “friends” who rely on him, is the essence of the marginally effective reckless counsellor from Arizona.
With all those trips to consult with your real “clients,” did you at least get some extra frequent flyer miles on Aeromexico? Or were the recurrent Mexico City trips done on Marco’s new private wings? Not a bad lifestyle there is it, Dennis, now that you’ve changed sides. From a short term point of view, sure beats the heck out of those cheap offices you used to complain about when you were working for the good guys, doesn’t it. And your new friends will even offer to wack your enemies, further inflating your ego, if such a thing is even possible at this point. Let’s see, how is it they rationalize things…”we’re not going to be here forever, so we may as well live it up while we are.” Right? Except, dicho en español. Now you’re helping the cartel interests on U.S. soil. Indeed, helping the NXIVM Sex Cult is a whole new chapter for Dennis K. Burke, the disgraced prosecutor from Arizona turned NXIVM Sex Cult advocate!
You mean NX tricked the Court into lighter bail conditions on a false promise for a plea deal?
That’s great news, Bangcock!
Here’s the SQUAT Nancy Pants will soon be discoing too sans pants:
“SQUAT, SPREAD, COUGH!”
Perhaps the DOJ has so much evidence they don’t need any plea deals from anybody. Bottom line is we don’t know and guessing which way it is going to go is just that – guessing.
Guess what, Schlock(s)? This is a free-to-guess zone.
In fact, it wasn’t too long ago your wild guess that Ben Zemeckus partied with Allison, KAR, Stormy Daniels and a whole swamp load of politicians made almost-Hollywood headlines, now was it?
And guess what, you’re allowed to guess wrong, too. …Please inform any of your personalities who MAY go by the name “One Night in Bangkok.”
Just the other day Heidi thought that ‘Bangkok’ aka ‘Clicky,’ was someone who had been involved in NXIVM and who knew about her and her sister’s stay in Bangkok. Now Heidi believes that Bangkok is really Scott.
So does that mean you think Scott was involved in NXIVM, too?
… Heidi. I never guessed that Ben’s story was real or made up, I merely contacted Frank that it was an interesting story that should be told, because others may be able to corroborate it or prove it was not true. In the end, Frank decided Ben’s story was worth posting.
You’re … accusing me of posting under other IDs, as I’ve explained multiple times before, I don’t do that….
I object to Heidi being able to refer to me as Schlock, yet I can’t use a term that describes the whore she is.
The rules aka laws of liable, slander, defamation and/or intentional infliction of emotional distress are:
You may state the truth, however ugly. You may not state an uncertainty as fact but you may state it as your opinion.
As far as intent goes, it’s clear your sole intent is to inflict emotional distress on even complete strangers who visit this site, Schlock, with your constant name-calling and lack of any real knowledge of the subject matter. Whereas my intent with “Schlock” is to mitigate the impact of your insults on others in hopes they are less offended by you given your schlockyness.
Perhaps the editors of FR know that I am not, in fact, a “whore” and are therefore uncomfortable allowing that comment. Whereas, I am very confident that “Schlock” is a suitable description re: the vast majority of what you have to say, especially your juvenile insults.
What other word, besides “whore”, did you want to use, Scott?
Heidi, if you’re allowed to guess, than we are all allowed to guess, right? However, a guess without any evidence to back it up is probably just a tactic that is being used to discredit someone.
Everything on this website is an opinion. …
Flowers, since the word wasn’t approved to be published, I can’t tell you what it was, but here’s some synonyms, all of which are my opinion, it goes without saying, except that I just did: odious, wicked, evil, atrocious, monstrous, disgraceful, abominable, detestable, contemptible, reprehensible, despicable, horrible, horrific, horrifying, terrible, awful, abhorrent, loathsome, outrageous, shocking, shameful, hateful, hideous, unspeakable, unpardonable, unforgivable, inexcusable, execrable, ghastly, iniquitous, villainous, nefarious, beneath contempt, beyond the pale; rareegregious, flagitious.
Flowers gets to call Heidi a W***e, while Scott gets to expand on his original insult with a list.. from the dictionary! Frank’s special ones, whose hatred must fuel ratings. Go ahead block this too, you wouldn’t want to offend them.
Technically, the list was not from the dictionary, it was from a thesaurus.