priceofliberty:

priceofliberty:

 CNBC article regarding a 43 Trillion Lawsuit has been taken down; that same day, two children of CNBC staff are found dead.The article discussed the largest financial laundering scheme in U.S. history.
The article was taken down that I wrote about yesterday.  I got the screen shots of it on CNBC and so there is proof that it was there and a lawsuit was filed against the banksters and top government officials. The original link to CNBC is here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/49555671/  (you can still see the comments left from the article at the bottom of the page and that the article was about the lawsuit.  (Until they make the page a “404” error) Here is my article about it with the screenshots: http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2012/10/43-trillion-dollar-suit-against-us-govt.html What gives this more of a twist is the horrendous murder of two young children in NYC.  An anonymous/Alison left a comment on the above article, saying that the CNBC Sr. V.P. executive of digital (internet) had his children murdered the same day/hours after the article came out.  Here is the comment:
 Hi Sherrie,  Of course the following could just be a coincidence…. You might also find it interesting to note that the chief exec of CNBC digital Kevin Krim’s children were murdered (2 of them) on the VERY same day this article went live. Supposidly their nanny killed them but I guess we’ll never know seeing as she apparently slit her own throat and wrists and is now in critical condition in hospital. I doubt very much she’ll make it!http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9635446/Two-children-stabbed-to-death-in-luxury-New-York-apartment.html Reads like an episode on Damages… Alison
 I found more articles about the murder of the children online.  Here is one from CNN that has been updated and proclaims the nanny stabbed herself when she heard the mother come in the apartment.  Is it all coincidence that it happened hours after CNBC put the 43 trillion lawsuit online?
 The children’s father, Kevin Krim, a senior vice president for CNBC Digital and former Yahoo executive, was en route back home from the West Coast. Police broke the news to him at John F. Kennedy International Airport.
 I feel for the family.  I simply can’t imagine the most horrendous  nightmare of having your children murdered. Now CNBC has taken down the article/information about the lawsuit, I figured that would happen and that is why I captured every bit of it on the CNBC website.   I captured it compared to reproducing for three reasons. One:  It says “copyrighted” at the bottom Two:  To show and prove it was on CNBC and not made up (which can appear to be when just copying material) Three:  To have a record of it, when it disappeared off the net.   FYI:  It does seem they are erasing the whole page, now only 2 comments are left on the page.  There were many more comments yesterday about the lawsuit on CNBC. I found that Marketwatch has the same information up about the lawsuit at this time.  Here is the screenshot of it on their page:

 Question is:  How long will it stay up on Marketwatch and will something happen to an executive or their family there of a horrendous nature or accident?

Here is the Marketwatch (Wall Street Journal) report on the 43 trillion dollar lawsuit.

Here’s more on that CNBC murder case. 

priceofliberty:

priceofliberty:

CNBC article regarding a 43 Trillion Lawsuit has been taken down; that same day, two children of CNBC staff are found dead.

The article discussed the largest financial laundering scheme in U.S. history.

The article was taken down that I wrote about yesterday.  I got the screen shots of it on CNBC and so there is proof that it was there and a lawsuit was filed against the banksters and top government officials.

The original link to CNBC is here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/49555671/  (you can still see the comments left from the article at the bottom of the page and that the article was about the lawsuit.  (Until they make the page a “404” error)

Here is my article about it with the screenshots:

http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com/2012/10/43-trillion-dollar-suit-against-us-govt.html

What gives this more of a twist is the horrendous murder of two young children in NYC.  An anonymous/Alison left a comment on the above article, saying that the CNBC Sr. V.P. executive of digital (internet) had his children murdered the same day/hours after the article came out.

Here is the comment:

 Hi Sherrie,

Of course the following could just be a coincidence….

You might also find it interesting to note that the chief exec of CNBC digital Kevin Krim’s children were murdered (2 of them) on the VERY same day this article went live.
Supposidly their nanny killed them but I guess we’ll never know seeing as she apparently slit her own throat and wrists and is now in critical condition in hospital. I doubt very much she’ll make it!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9635446/Two-children-stabbed-to-death-in-luxury-New-York-apartment.html

Reads like an episode on Damages…

Alison


I found more articles about the murder of the children online.  Here is one from CNN that has been updated and proclaims the nanny stabbed herself when she heard the mother come in the apartment.
Is it all coincidence that it happened hours after CNBC put the 43 trillion lawsuit online?

 The children’s father, Kevin Krim, a senior vice president for CNBC Digital and former Yahoo executive, was en route back home from the West Coast. Police broke the news to him at John F. Kennedy International Airport.


I feel for the family.  I simply can’t imagine the most horrendous  nightmare of having your children murdered.

Now CNBC has taken down the article/information about the lawsuit, I figured that would happen and that is why I captured every bit of it on the CNBC website.   I captured it compared to reproducing for three reasons.

One:  It says “copyrighted” at the bottom
Two:  To show and prove it was on CNBC and not made up (which can appear to be when just copying material)
Three:  To have a record of it, when it disappeared off the net. 


FYI:  It does seem they are erasing the whole page, now only 2 comments are left on the page.  There were many more comments yesterday about the lawsuit on CNBC.

I found that Marketwatch has the same information up about the lawsuit at this time.  Here is the screenshot of it on their page:


Question is:  How long will it stay up on Marketwatch and will something happen to an executive or their family there of a horrendous nature or accident?

Here is the Marketwatch (Wall Street Journal) report on the 43 trillion dollar lawsuit.

Here’s more on that CNBC murder case. 

5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search (Even if You Have Nothing to Hide)

shorterexcerpts:

5 Reasons You Should Never Agree to a Police Search (Even if You Have Nothing to Hide)

(1) It’s your constitutional right.

The 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. Unless police have strong evidence (probable cause) to believe you’re involved in criminal activity, they need your permission to perform a search of you or your property.

You have the right to refuse random police searches anywhere and anytime, so long as you aren’t crossing a border checkpoint or entering a secure facility like an airport. Don’t be shy about standing up for your own privacy rights, especially when police are looking for evidence that could put you behind bars.

(2) Refusing a search protects you if you end up in court.

It’s always possible that police might search you anyway when you refuse to give consent, but that’s no reason to say “yes” to the search. Basically, if there’s any chance of evidence being found, agreeing to a search is like committing legal suicide, because it kills your case before you even get to court.

If you refuse a search, however, the officer will have to prove in court that there was probable cause to do a warrantless search. This will give your lawyer a good chance to win your case, but this only works if you said “no” to the search.

(3) Saying “no” can prevent a search altogether.

Data on police searches are interesting, but they don’t show how many searches didn’t happen because a citizen said no. A non-search is a non-event that goes unrecorded, giving rise to a widespread misconception that police will always search with or without permission.

I know refusing searches works because I’ve been collecting stories from real police encounters. The reality is that police routinely ask for permission to search when they have absolutely no evidence of an actual crime. If you remain calm and say no, there’s a good chance they’ll back down, because it’s a waste of time to do searches that won’t hold up in court anyway.

(4) Searches can waste your time and damage your property.

Do you have time to sit around while police rifle through your belongings? Police often spend 30 minutes or more on vehicle searches and even longer searching homes. You certainly can’t count on officers to be careful with valuables or to put everything back where they found it. If you waive your 4th Amendment rights by agreeing to be searched, you will have few legal options if any property is damaged or missing after the search.

(5) You never know what they’ll find.

Are you 100 percent certain there’s nothing illegal in your home or vehicle? You can never be too sure. A joint roach could stick to your shoe on the street and wind up on the floorboard. A careless acquaintance could have dropped a baggie behind the seat. Try telling a cop it isn’t yours, and they’ll just laugh and tell you to put your hands behind your back. If you agreed to the search, you can’t challenge the evidence. But if you’re innocent and you refused the search, your lawyer has a winnable case.