ON THANKSGIVING - THIER FINEST TRICK, CONFLICT

  EXCUSE: SIERRA HAS IT TOO; THAT SIERRA IS NOT A PARLIAMENT THEY SKIP
IN THEIR SPLIT MIND. THAT SIERRA IS NOT TO MENDLE THE ISSUE - HELPS
THEIR INCESTOUS BRAIN IN THEI SELF REPRESENTATION ONLY.



  WHAT DOES SIERRA GET?

This convention in Sierra, than lefties "club' aspiring to be a party
with the back door impact on the big politics:

"An Inconvenient Adjudication Impacting Water Rights on the Rio
Grande
What if the actions leading to the creation of Elephant Butte Dam, the
Rio Grande Project, and the Elephant Butte Irrigation District (EBID)
will soon be overturned in court? What might the impact of such a
court decision be and might this change be inconvenient for certain
parties?"

AND

Attention! Watch the C-Span: Same language -" Water's adjudication new
documents puts the ethics proceedings in limbo" ( as refrazed from the
10 sec flush that was interfered and I never opened it).

Watersa is of Course the distinct Senator that the offenders in the
Sewnate try to inflame. They allege conflict of interests as the crime
in itself while the conflict of interets is the situation in whivch
conflicted party has a business not to go in as this means that it
will not be ethical whatever she decides ; resulution is that the
higher authoprity ahed of situation going into the conflict tips it in
one side and thus the person that tel;ls the boss that this si
conflicted relayed the liability to that authority as well ( as one
scenario) or oin case of confidential professional matter - recuses
self even in case of potential conflict to not harm anyone ( mostly in
the civil service and in teh sprivite service industry). No person
taht is not psychotic / self defeating elects to harm self - this one
is not a crime - it is only self defeat by unclear bounderies taht
harms the one that gets in like that.
Third way is that the person handles the business with the conflict of
interest witrh the risk in it that allbe dissatisfied. If they are and
that is not the crime than it is a struggle for the person. If the
conflict person got in forced her to commit the crime, crime is
commited by the person not the conflict.

In case of Waters she minimized the impact but not the appearance of
the conflict and the 'jokers' landeed on her like the vouchers as they
can steall the seat  ( at least in their perception -apperance as is).

 In balance the 'jokers' need to be cut by the leader if there is one
that knows the policy. We are apprently short of the leders that
understand policiues and mechganisms of the institutions regardls how
ledership breading is the Washington DC together with all leadership
programs at the Universitis there and outside of it and regadles sthat
half of the books sheves are on leadership.
 ( I am not kidding - i checked these personally; the Senate jokers
refused to form the science alliences there and to have the book store
or the library that si based in science - they prefere to mendle the
water by alredy blended minds on the chip). The problem is that they
took on the companis that do suppose 'medical reaseach' while this is
only extention of fascist experiomentation on humans in the illegal
way, making humans their victims even if these only colleagues in the
Senate, and they hold to their fascist stand, bold and nude, never
mind the conflicts. They are uneducated often lawyers not having the
clue of policy or the science that applies, they surely do not want
science to tell them what to do with slaves. They also call putting
chips in humans: medical exoence and opr medical reseach, while they
violete essential human rights. Nancy has most powrfull assault weapon
in NASA , that she probably did not pay for and attacks people like me
to juts tell her anything about the brain, trying to kidnap me,
arranging the police; taking out nieces and nepheves to their custody
and abusing them.

I ASKED PEOPLE OF THE RELATED COMMUNITIS TO CONFRONT FASCISM BY TAKING
THE TOOLS AWAY FROM THEM. I HAVE SOME RESULTS.

Apropos, in Senate isues are not adjudicated ( that is reserved for
the Court); they are legislated; legislative process finished is the
pararel to 'matter adjudicated ( implies already)