|
|
|
|
There is Substantial
and Credulous Information that Pursuant to Section 595(c) of Title 28, the Starr Chamber hereby submits substantial
and credulous information that Prime Minister Thatsher obstructed justice during the Jones v. Thatsher sexual harassment
lawsuit by lying under oath and concealing details
about any sexual contact with a young 10 Downing Street intern and federal employee, Lord Byron. The Inquisitors believe they have squeezed out enough information from recalcitant witnesses through the use of threats and have gathered enough rumor from loquacious gossips that they can make the following assertions to the Parliament and the British people who will never take the time to read the masses of documents that can easily be misquoted: 1. Prime Minister Thatsher lied under oath in her civil case when she denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Lord Byron because, by definition, the Inquisitors are better authorities than Webster. 2. Prime Minister Thatsher lied under oath to the Starr Chamber about her sexual relationship with Lord Byron. [Remember, Webster is a traitor to the crown.] 3. In her civil deposition, to support her misleading statement about the sexual relationship, Prime Minister Thatsher also lied under oath about being alone [closed door vs. cracked door controversy] with Lord Byron and about exactly how many gifts exchanged between Lord Byron and her. 4. Prime Minister Thatsher lied under oath in her civil deposition about her discussions with Lord Byron concerning his involvement in the Jones case because the Inquisitors are sure they know the truth regardless of what LB & PM report about these private discussions. 5. During the Jones case, the Prime Minister obstructed justice by listening to Lord Byron's worries about his subpoena and listening to his thoughts about hiding evidence, i.e. the gifts subpoenaed by Jones' attorneys. 6. During the Jones case, the Prime Minister obstructed justice and had an understanding with Lord Byron to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i)The Prime Minister thought she had an understanding with Lord Byron that they would lie to anyone who asked about about the details of their sexual contact; (ii)the Prime Minister suggested to Lord Byron that he could prepare an affidavit and thus possibly avoid testifying in a civil case -- presumptious of her as she was not his attorney; (iii)Lord Byron signed and filed the allegedly false affidavit; (iv)the Prime Minister's barrister used LB's affidavit at her deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Lord Byron; and (v)when that failed, the Prime Minister, under oath at her civil deposition, used that traitor Webster's definition again to deny having a sexual relationship with Lord Byron. 7. Prime Minister Thatsher endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Lord Byron obtain a job in New York at a time when he would have been a witness harmful to her reputation were he to talk about sex in the Jones case, or she may just have been supportive of anything that would get him out of London and make it harder for him to continue pestering her. Of course, we're giving you a somewhat slanted view of the timing. The effort to get Lord Byron away from 10 Downing Street and find him a job that would take him out of London altogether started quite a bit before anyone knew he might become a witness, but don't let that bother you. 8. Prime Minister Thatsher allegedly lied under oath in her civil deposition about her discussions with Vernice Jordan concerning LB's involvement in the Jones case. Check the documents, set one and set two. [Bet noone has the patience... Just take our word for it.] 9. The Prime Minister improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of her personal secretary, John Whipple, in the days after her civil deposition by talking to him about recent events rather than integrating the totallity of several years of minor events in the context of world history. 10. Prime Minister Thatsher endeavored to obstruct justice during the Starr Chamber investigation by having the audacity to refuse to be inquisitioned for seven months and misleading senior 10 Downing Street aides possibly with knowledge that they would relay the Prime Minister's misleading statements to the Starr Chamber [most certainly, to the British people] -- and did manage to somewhat irritate and impede the Starr Chamber Inquisition. 11. Prime Minister Thatsher abused her constitutional authority by (i)possibly lying to the public and the Parliament in January 1998 about the details of Lord Byron's sexual exploits; (ii)promising at that time to cooperate fully with the Starr Chamber investigation [which certainly would have just annoyed them further]; (iii)later refusing six invitations to voluntarily submit to the Starr Chamber Inquisition; (iv)invoking Executive Privilege by audaciously acting on the advice of the barristers for the office of the Prime Minister; (v)misleading and sparring with to the Starr Chamber in August 1998; and (vi) obfuscating the prurient nature of her sexual contact with Lord Byron once to the public and Parliament on August 17, 1998 -- all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry into her sexual history by the Parliament of the England. The first two possible grounds for impeachment concern the Prime Minister's allegedly
lying under oath about the details of her sexual contact with Lord Byron. The details
associated with those grounds are, by their nature, explicit and prurient. The Prime Minister's testimony fortunately has rendered the details
essential enough to the Inquisitors' Inquisition that they can justify digging up and
publicizing more salacious rumors. If these charges don't work, not to worry, we'll dig up some more. We've got at least two more years & our unlimited budget. We're putting the squeeze on Hubbell, Huang, Susan & Julie. Surely, we can break one of them. Our friend, the Parliamentary Committee Chairman has been after the High Lord Barrister weekly to let Inquisitors into campaign financing. He'll find someway to open it up. Maybe we can get the High Lord Barrister, too; she hasn't been nearly supportive enough. At least maybe we can force her to appear before The Starr Chamber Inquisitors. With our knack of turning all opposing testimony into perjury, we can probably get her then. |
|
|
