Exposing The Publisher: Using Sandy Hook To Further An Agenda


shoe pounderIn the aftermath of the Sandy Hook School shooting in Connecticut, I was left with a feeling of disgust and deep, personal sadness. Working for an inspection company, using Infrared techniques in the mid 2000’s, I had an opportunity to work for that school district. Though I never had the opportunity to visit that school in particular, I did work with many in that community.

However, when I read this article blog posted by the Publisher of that over opinionated web site, that I hate to mention, I had never felt more disgusted by a human being in my life. Not even the shooter of this cold blooded, child massacre could disgust me more than the man named Mark Hallburn. Known in my world as The Publisher.

For those of you new to whom this man is, let me give you a reason, a bullet point list if you will, why I go after scumbags like this.

Certified delusional.
Grandiose sense of entitlement.
Manipulative.
No compassion for anyone, other than himself.
Liar.
Cheater.
Criminal.

Look, my list could go on but what really bothers me about someone like this is he uses our 1st amendment like it was a cheap whore. He refers to that anytime he is stifled to saying something, anything, whether it’s true or not. But he has twisted his lies and halve truths around so much in his lifetime that nothing he says is even close to the truth. He then will abuse your right to free speech when your opinion is a counter or doesn’t agree with his. He has blocked myself and many detractors from posting the truth or viable comments from his web site, his Facebook page and other places. That’s not a complaint. I don’t care that he does that to me. I will still get the truth out.

Back to the original crux of this blog post. (Note, I did not claim to be a journalist of a news site, but let me be perfectly clear on what you are about to read. I did my research on this subject, which I can promise you, the Publisher…did not.) What disgusted me the most about The Publisher’s recent blog post that he tries to call a news story? The fact that he would even remotely use it in his ongoing custody battle with his second ex-wife and the judge that is over seeing that case. In a nutshell, Mark’s past has caught up with him and he has limited visitation with his son. For a good reason. Everything this mostly unemployed, criminal blowhard (and lets not forget the documentation of his delusion) has been taken into account in his custody battle, including the risk of flight with the child. Yet he tries to blame judges for the massacre in Newtown.

We begin with his first paragraph;

The Sandy Hook School massacre has left many people asking why. Before the shell casings cooled, the ‘why’ debate started. Gun critics blamed the National Rifle Association. Mental Health critics blamed the lack of mental health care. Almost overlooked in the debate were headlines from The Los Angeles Times: Connecticut Shooter Was Estranged From Father. The sub headline stated that the shooter “Hadn’t seen his father in two years-despite the father’s efforts. Another headline read, “Upset by divorce? Outsider? Seeking clues in school shooter’s past.

First off, Adam Lanza wasn’t set off to do what he did by not being able to see his father. It was his mental instability that led to these horrific acts. A product of today’s culture and politically correct nature. If a parent was to blame (and they weren’t) it would be his mother more so than his father. You see, Nancy Lanza was ready to move to Washington state (she is also a bit of a Survivalist as it turns out) and get Adam some help. Adam thought he was just going to be sent away. If that was his trigger, then what could anyone do?

Yet, here is The Publisher, taking an LA Times (very liberal and out of touch with this story being 3500 miles away) article and using it as a basis for his story to do one thing. Further his agenda. He hates Judge Kelly (the judge in his custody battle) so much that he will grasp at any shred of information that will help him sell his side of the story.

His side is false. I did my own research. A few phone calls and some friendly advise later and I was able to get the court documents (which are now of public record) of the Lanza’s divorce. Here is what I found;

The documents suggest the couple argued very little. They agreed to split up their jewelry, clothes and family photos and the usual banal items. Adam would live with his mother, the couple agreed, and they agreed to talk about the important decisions when they came up.

If they couldn’t agree on something when it came to Adam’s upbringing, Nancy “shall make the final decision,” according to the Sept. 24, 2009, settlement approved by Judge Stanley Novak.

Reading it over, there is nothing in the divorce court file that mentions why the couple decided to split or any underlying problems. The file simply says the marriage “has broken down irretrievably and there is no possibility of getting back together.” There was never a time that Adam Lanza was denied a chance to see his father nor was peter Lanza denied a chance to see his son.

So what The Publisher has done once again is taken someone else’s opinion, that happens to fit his agenda, and made it the underlying problem of Adam Lanza when quite clearly, he was just unstable. I could stop right there Mark continues;

There are many psychological studies and statistics that prove that children who come from broken homes suffer. Too many to list here. Many others prove that children without the strong presence of fathers in their lives also suffer. Yet America allows these situations to continue.

I don’t argue that point at all. That is true. But I say it is only a small part in this situation with Lanza. It certainly isn’t the judges fault.  What i take umbrage with is that he is saying we are  allowing this to happen.  No we aren’t.  What we have allowed is a decline in our family nucleolus.  We’ve forgiven too many moral inconsistencies and not been heavy handed enough with punishment and correction within the homes.  We try, oh we do indeed try, but we’ve been forced to get a second job while the spouse has been forced to get a full time one as well, leaving out kids to fend way too much entirely by themselves.

Here in West Virginia, Putnam(redeacted).com has identified two judges whose anti-fatherhood and anti-family stances are improper: Kanawha County Family Court Judge Michael J. Kelly and Supreme Court Justice Menis E. Ketchum.

In the case of Bill Henry, Kelly refused to return Henry’s runaway teenage daughter to him. She was staying with friends. In doing so, Kelly improperly stripped Henry’s right to be a father to his daughter. At one point the insensitive and arrogant Kelly said that “Anyone can live with anything for 19 days” but never reversed his temporary order.

We don’t know what happened in this case.  Number one, the video that the Publisher was given was edited and cut down to a 5 second clip of Judge Kelly’s quote.  We have no context to why that was said.  Number two, this is a child’s case and all records are sealed.  There is no information available as to why the Judge decreed what he did and there is no basis to what actually happened.  Again, a douchebag saying things to make you believe someone is corrupt.

In the case of Putnam(redacted).com Publisher Mark Hallburn, Kelly reduced Hallburn’s parenting time to less than 70-percent based on false allegations in a temporary custody hearing. Later, it was determined that the allegations were false and made merely on “beliefs” rather than fact. Despite numerous requests, Kelly has refused to reverse his fatally-flawed ruling and even rejected an Emergency Father’s Day visitation motion because he did not receive it 10 days before Father’s Day. Obviously Kelly does not understand the definition of “Emergency.”

I am surprised that The Publisher doesn’t pull a hammy when he reaches for these preposterous statements. First off, the allegations are, indeed, true. It’s been proven before in the past. This means that when it extends to the custody hearing, it’s still true. There are NO false allegations here. There is only fact that Mark cannot function normally within normal society and that has been proven time and again as well. The Publisher is also known to file a harassing amount of FOIA’s, lawsuit paperwork and motions such as this “emergency” fathers day visitation motion. He also demands the most ridicules forms of compensation when he feels wronged. Ten million dollars from AEP when his power flickered for 9 seconds, 1 million from a doctors office for making him wait and most recently he wanted his dead mother unearthed and brought back to life. I’ll let you read that and soak it in.

Done?

I know right!? Let’s continue;

Sidebar:

During the broadcast of my radio show I was informed (by a reliable source) that Mark Hallburns visitation rights sit at 25%.  That’s semantic’s you douchebag!  The Publisher says “below 70%” yet the real story comes out.  It’s such a small percentage because of his own wrong doings.

End Sidebar.

When Ketchum asked for-and received Emergency Father’s Day motion from Hallburn his arrogant response was to violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and order Hallburn not to contact the West Virginia Supreme Court about the case any longer. Kelly later retaliated by refusing to let Hallburn’s son travel with him out-of-state SPECIFICALLY because Hallburn complained to Ketchum who responded with the illegal order.

::coughBULLSHITcough::

How is this breaking his 1st amendment right? He’s already proven to be a harassing lunatic and can’t grasp the concept of “a right to” and “an abuse of” the first amendment. Judge Kelly wasn’t retaliating against anything. He was simply doing his job of protecting the child in this case. By the way, this was when The Publisher wanted to take his kid to see his dying grandmother which you just read about.

Kelly’s antics are nothing new. The group Men and Women Against Discrimination (bunch of crackpots) called for Kelly’s removal (didn’t work, failed miserably) from the bench years ago after he testified that he ignored (no, did his job) state law about parental custody. In the Hallburn case he commented that state law would not allow either parent to get primary custody-then, in his wrongful temporary ruling, gave primary custody to Dolores Halburn. Nearly a year later, because Kelly has not issued a final (close enough, just a matter of final details) divorce decree, that “temporary” ruling remains in effect, denying Mark Hallburn his proper rights as a father. This is classic Kelly misconduct (actually, he is just letting Mark hang himself): Acknowledge the law, then circumvent it (which The Publisher does with the truth). He clearly does this because the West Virginia Supreme Court, including Ketchum, allow Kelly to do this.

When Ketchum handed down the Administrative Order, he violated federal constitutional law. When Kelly cited that order and retaliated against Hallburn, he also violated federal constitutional law.

What law?  The right to be a douchebag, pond scum swiller?

Kelly and Ketchum claim to be highly educated men. However, their arrogance and misconduct only prove that they are fools that somehow managed to earn law degrees-then sucker voters into electing them. Kelly and Ketchum lack common decency and common sense. Therefore they have no business serving on any bench.

Blah Blah Blah. You know, I thought I was bad when I got on my rants about things that piss me off. At least I had the common sense to get my facts straight before I go off at the mouth. The Publisher has his running like a whip-poor-wills rear end. So Judge Kelly doing his job is nothing more than just antics and shenanigans to The Publisher? That’s just like the losers that owe money in Judge Watkins court and they get all PC and defensive when he yells at them for it. They bring false charges and force the man to change something that wasn’t really wrong to begin with. Oh and as far as the decree for Mark’s custody hearing? It’s pretty much final. But due to Mark’s own paperwork crush on the court system, it hasn’t been officially finalized. Thus, Judge Kelly can change this to fit the situation properly. This means Mark will lose even more visitation time because of his own selfishness, senselessness and stupidity.

I will state that after reading up on some cases that both Kelly and Ketchem have been involved with, they are truly intelligent and forthright men. They take their jobs to heart and have a passion about the law. They will not let a few bad apples make this system weak and for that, people point at them and say “he’s not fair, he’s not smart.”

Some may say that removing two judges over two cases is extreme. However, there are many more people that contacted Putnam(redacted).com citing abuse by Kelly. They are simply afraid that he will retaliate against them (like he did with Hallburn) and do not want their names and cases published. This alone is grounds to remove a judge. No one should have to fear retaliation-including the loss of precious time with their children.

This is not an outright lie…but it’s pretty close. No one of importance has contact The Publisher other than a few jilted Kool-aid drinkers and of course, The Publisher’s own cronies, namely Troy Sexton, whom just has a problem with the entire system because, well quite frankly, he’s an idiot. You see, in a nutshell, The Publisher likes to embellish things and he does it so much, he actually believes his own stories. But there will never be one ounce of proof supplied. By the way, no one other than the criminals that have faced these judges fears any due process.

In fairness to the courts, there are abusive fathers. Same for mothers. Each should be kept from their children until counseling and other intervention takes place. However, neither Hallburn or Henry abused their children and too many fathers are held back from parenting simply because ignorant judges automatically award primary custody to mothers.

Abusive fathers? Yes, there are certainly abusive fathers. I can name one right off the top of my head that The Publisher pals around with and defends. Troy Sexton. Oh wait, there’s another. Convicted child molester, Bob Harper. As far as Hallburn is concerned, what Judge Kelly is really doing is keeping the kid safe from a volatile, angry man that has little to his name and a shoddy job track record. There would be no way that kid would be safe with that man over the course of time. Visitations (and less of it in this case) is the key to the child’s safety.  Also, in Bill Henry’s case, we don’t know the man and we don’t know what happened behind closed doors that made the child run away.  He doesn’t air any dirty laundry in some blog publicly.

At this point, I know I have pretty much poked holes in every argument or statement The Publisher has made but I will offer up evidence that he alone has provided. I want you to read this next quote closely and if you have an ounce of common sense you will see the evidence as plain as day.

Complaints have been filed against both Kelly and Ketchum with the West Virginia Judicial Investigative Commission. It claims to have processes to deal with bad judges. However, those processes are broken and must be immediately replaced. The JIC has no option other than to do the following: 1) IMMEDIATELY order Kelly and Ketchum to restore every moment of lost time with their children. EVERY moment. This means rolling back the clock-which will be a huge challenge for Kelly and Ketchum-but is their problem. 2) IMMEDIATELY remove from the bench. 3) Throw them into prison for violating federal constitutional law. 4) Set down standards to make sure this does not happen again. 5) Change the way the JIC conducts business so that judges are properly supervised to make sure this does not happen again. 6) Turn over custody rulings to juries consisting of parents. 7) Order the West Virginia Supreme Court to immediately allow temporary orders to be appealed. 8) Turn over all courtroom videos to the news media for us to publish. (Redact the names of cases and digitize the images of petitioners and respondents) 9) Allow reporters into family law courtrooms to keep an eye on judges. 10) Allow the public to address the West Virginia Supreme Court justices at every hearing. 11) Transform the JIC into a civilian review board. 12) Two-year terms for all judges. 13) Recalls for all public officials-elected, appointed, and hired. This must include judges. 14) Term limits for all elected public officials-including judges.

All of these things must happen by the close of business, Friday, December 21, 2012 so that fathers can make sure their rights to be with their children are not violated on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day.

First off, there are no viable complaints. Secondly, most of them are filed by The Publisher himself. But did you read that? An insane rambling of a list of things that he wants done to the judges, the system and the Constitution itself and he wanted all done within a few days so he could what? Spend a few hours with a boy that doesn’t really want to spend anymore time with him other than to get some fast food and a bike. Other than that, the kid would have had to sit around on the couch watching movies and cartoons that his dad bought (that will turn him as gay as Perez Hilton) while daddy plays newspaper man and posts his drivel on an online diary of hate.  I don’t even have to go over the insanity that is this list he posted that he demanded be done. Do I? DO I?!

I didn’t think so.

Finally, the nail in the coffin for this entire article. The one line in this entire article that goes a long way to prove that Mark Hallburn, aka The Publisher, is nothing more than a raving lunatic with a sense of entitlement bigger than our national debt. It also shows how much of a threat he is to the general public.

It’s highly unlikely that any West Virginia father will shoot up a school like the incident in Connecticut. However we simply cannot afford another Sandy Hook incident or any other problems with our children because of the courts continuing to improperly interfere with the rights of fathers to parent their children.

A threat? Indeed.

It proves that this man is no more than a low life, looking to get first in line with his hand out for the government cheese, using and stepping on anyone (including his kid) to get there. As the great Mike Balburn, who’s super secret identity remains hidden for obvious reasons, the one that leads the way in revealing the ugliness of Mark Hallburn’s antics has pointed out on many occasions;

“Given his degree of agitation and volatility noted during our examination, any threats made by Mr. Halburn should be taken seriously and dealt with appropriately.”

Taken directly from Mark Hallburn’s own psychiatric report. It’s time to put this guy in his place and that means an extreme decision. Remove him from public and lock him away where he can pretend to be a news reporter, a home owner, a job holder and a loving father all he wants, only, he won’t be hurting anyone with his pretend life.

He Didn’t Just Say That…Did He?


Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told reporters that civilian courts are well-suited to prosecute al Qaeda terrorists and that “if people don’t believe in our system, maybe they ought to go somewhere else.”

Conrad also dismissed a question about the rights of terrorists captured on foreign battlefields and the rules of evidence in terms of a civilian court trial as not serious.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced on Nov. 13 that five suspects in the 9/11 attacks would be tried in a civilian court in New York City instead of facing a military trial.

My Response:

Hey Conrad.  You can kiss my ass, sir.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Tenth Amendment.

The Constitution was designed specifically with the purpose of limiting the powers of the federal government while preserving the power of the States.  Not preserving the rights of some cracked in the head extremist nutjob.

Yet, today, the federal government has managed to become a leviathan; its tentacles protruding into every aspect of its citizen’s lives. One tentacle reaches into your pocket while the other gives your money to someone else. It hovers over its citizens with the intention of protecting them, but concomitantly suffocates them.  Even worse, it ignores them while slapping them in the face with a grand standing trial of a terrorist.

Where is the constitutional authority for a mandatory federal retirement program; or a mandatory health care system; or a Department of Education? These are powers reserved for the States as per the Tenth Amendment.

Like an insatiable beast, this leviathan lives off of two main food groups: paychecks and ignorance. Foolish appeasers promise to feed the beast even more of these foodstuffs.

The current batch of Democrat cool aid drinkers have promised college for everyone, free health care for everyone, free kindergarten for all kids, continued retirement for everyone, a cure for cancer, renewable energy for everyone, and five thousand dollars for every newborn; all of these programs thrown on the back of citizens that these demagogues consider to be too wealthy. In fact, the supposedly wealthy now fund 50% of tax receipts despite only consisting of 5% of the population. Furthermore, these taxpayers are taxed at a higher rate than the rest of their countrymen.

From where does the federal government derive such power? It certainly is not provided by the Constitution.

And if you don’t like that Mr.Conrad….you…can leave.

Should Osama Have Basic Rights?


The Bad Side…LIVE! (November 23rd, 2009)

When asked whether al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden should have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told reporters that everyone who is accused of a crime should have the same “basic rights” afforded by the U.S. Constitution.

On Capitol Hill on Nov. 19, a reporter asked Kucinich, “If and when the U.S. captures Osama Bin Laden, should he have the right to remain silent and be given a lawyer–told he can get a lawyer?”

Kucinich said: “I think that America does best when the values that we want other nations to share that we profess and stand by, and I think that every one who is accused of a crime should have the basic rights that are afforded. I mean, that’s what America’s about.”

My Response:

Does this sound right to anybody? Lets think about this.  The self proclaimed mastermind behind the most notorious terrorist group in the world today.  A man that claims responsibility for over 10,000 deaths.  A man who would no sooner spit on the Constitution or in our faces than to be tried by that Constitution…and this ear wax of a human being (Kucinich)  suddenly gets behind the Constitution by saying it’s what we are all about?

(BUZZER)

Look, I have always said I will defend this Constitution, but only when it comes to those that it is designed to protect.  Lets forget (if at all possible) the fact that Osama Bin Laden is whom he is as far as being a terrorist.  Lets take the most important thing into consideration.  He’s not a US citizen to which this situation would apply.

And that brings me to another thing.  Kevin, in Colchester dropped me an IM this afternoon, asking about the new time slot.  He also wanted to know what my thought was on some of the media heads calling Gitmo unconstitutional.

Kevin?

The media has merged two different situations happening in the same place. Guantanamo (or Gitmo as it is known by Marines stationed there) is a US Navy/Marine base that was forcibly taken in time of war. While the question of whether or not we should still occupy this position is up for debate. Keeping control of territory that was “legally” taken in a war is completely constitutional. It may have fallen out of favor in modern times, but it is not illegal.

The other issue that has been morphed into the same situation is the fact that the US government has used the fact that the base is located in a foreign country for (what the PCrs like to call) dubious reasons. Since it is a military base, things that seem normal in the continental US, don’t apply. There is no free access for the press. Or even the basic human rights that a prisoner could expect being incarcerated in say Florida.

Kevin says:

“After the 9/11 attacks, which the US government used to its advantage in every possible way, the accused terrorists were held at this facility. The key point to that statement is accused. There are still people being held there almost 8 years after the fact that still haven’t even been charged yet. The last time I heard we didn’t subscribe to the Napoleonic law code. By our laws you are innocent until you have been found guilty. Not held in captivity until enough evidence can be found to convict you.”

Even though a US military base is considered American territory, it is still outside our borders, Kevin. Since Gitmo is a hostile base the rules are different.

Humiliation, torture, and religious persecution can all happen and be covered up by that all powerful “top secret” stamp that the military and the government can use.

There are some that will say what has happened at the base are wrong, unconstitutional, and against the concepts that Americans claim to live by. I pose this fact.  What has taken place there and to whom it has affected, has nothing to do with the Constitution.  Those incarcerated there do not hold any US citizenship.  They have been accused of war crimes in many instances, which takes time and effort to clarify.  But again, there is no right to a speedy trial here.

If I were in charge, I’d say “whoa there, Achmed, yer not goin anywhere until I know you are not going to strap a bomb to your balls and walk into a crowded Macy’s screaming ‘Allah Akbar’, ya dig?”

The tree you should be barking up is the Geneva Convention laws and even then, the torture tactics that were used (successfully I might add) at Gitmo are not even covered by the Geneva Convention. The press has made these actions synonymous with the military base. Curse the actions that have taken place there and the officials that order and condone them, but don’t confuse it with what Gitmo is and what it has done to protect out land, interests and most importantly, our citizens.

For whatever reason you choose to believe in or disagree with, we have kept the area of the base and not returned it to Cuba. That is not unconstitutional. The two are not interchangeable just because as of late the same name is used for both situations.

So the military base of Guantanamo is a perfectly legal aspect of the US military. That makes the question of unconstitutionality easily answered and this is one more reason I say we don’t give up so easily on this.