Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Tim Ballard


Calm

Recommended Posts

On 10/3/2023 at 10:20 PM, pogi said:

Phish would do that place well!

While I’d choose Trey over the Edge any day of the week, it would be cool to hear the dynamics of the Edge’s obsessive attention to sound/effects on that system, but Trey’s far more dynamic and expressive playing (and facial grimacing), along with the band, more then makes up for that.  Not to mention the onstage antics and crowd experience.

Well, now, Pogi, do you want to go to Vegas with me? 😁

https://relix.com/news/detail/phish-announce-sphere-debut-with-four-night-run

 

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Well, now, Pogi, do you want to go to Vegas with me? 😁

https://relix.com/news/detail/phish-announce-sphere-debut-with-four-night-run

 

Are you kidding me!? 

I just put in a request for 3 tickets for the April 19th show.  Let’s meet up! 

Now please excuse me while I go Bouncing Around the Room. 

 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
2 hours ago, pogi said:

Are you kidding me!? 

I just put in a request for 3 tickets for the April 19th show.  Let’s meet up! 

Now please excuse me while I go Bouncing Around the Room. 

 

I haven't decided if I'm going to try for tickets or not. I'll let you know. It would super cool to meet up.

But you made me put on A Live One from '95 and start Bouncing Around the Room ;)

 

Link to comment
On 11/8/2023 at 7:55 AM, webbles said:

It doesn't look like this caused him (President Ballard) to loose his business or his license.  If you read the case that Calm linked to (https://casetext.com/case/silver-king-mines-inc-v-cohen), in the section " KEYSTONE PROCEEDINGS", it says:

If I read that correctly, Keystone Securities Corporation was formed solely to help with the public offering of stock.  It didn't exist before hand and was already in the process of shutting down before the SEC revocation.  It was a temporary job, at best.  Nothing in the SEC revocation announcement (https://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1963/dig071063.pdf) says that President Ballard lost his license.  Only that the company (Keystone Securities Corporation) had its broker-dealer registration revoked and that Keystone was already trying to do that so it doesn't even sound like a punishment.  It doesn't even sound like a slap on the wrist.  Keystone was already trying to revoke its broker-dealer registration and the SEC revoked it with a public news announcement.

I also found another case between Shasta and the SEC - https://casetext.com/case/shasta-minerals-v-sec.  In there, I found an interesting piece:

My guess is that the "local businessman" mentioned there is President Ballard.  This looks like the SEC didn't like the president of Shasta (K.L. Stoker) and wanted to make an example of him.  President Ballard, unfortunately, got in the middle of it.

I found a case that cites the Shasta case…the ultimate conclusion of the case appears to be the SEC used “its investigative powers to harass a company and, for reasons unrelated to the agency's legitimate purposes, obstruct or destroy its ability to conduct its business.”

https://casetext.com/case/polaris-intern-metals-v-ariz-corp-comn?q=Shasta minerals&sort=relevance&p=1&type=case&tab=keyword&jxs= 

Quote

We find instruction in Shasta Minerals Chemical Co. v. S.E.C., 328 F.2d 285 (10th Cir. 1964). At issue in Shasta Minerals was a subpoena issued by the S.E.C. to a company. When the company refused to comply, the S.E.C. brought a court action to enforce the subpoena. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The S.E.C. relied only on its investigative power to demand enforcement of the subpoena and declined to give any explanation for its actions. The company filed affidavits "showing a systematic persecution and harassment of [the company] and of its president." 328 F.2d at 287. The affidavits also stated that the S.E.C. had told the company that it would never be allowed to register under the federal securities laws. Because the S.E.C. had not controverted these allegations nor offered an explanation for its actions, the allegations were presumed true for purposes of the summary judgment motion. The appellate court held that in such circumstances, granting summary judgment in favor of the S.E.C. was improper because the allegations supported a claim that the S.E.C. had acted arbitrarily and beyond its authority. 

The Shasta Minerals case is distinguishable from the case in question because it involved the enforcement of a subpoena which requires court approval whereas an administrative investigation in general does not. But the central issue in Shasta Minerals is identical to the one presented here by appellants — can an agency use its investigative powers to harass a company and, for reasons unrelated to the agency's legitimate purposes, obstruct or destroy its ability to conduct its business?

 

Link to comment

A couple of other cases that use Shasta as an argument against government harassment and overstepping of authority (plus a few more not quoting but along the same lines).

 

 
As a corollary rule, the information must not be sought for harassment or other ulterior purpose, and no unnecessary or unreasonable burden may be cast upon the person being investigated. United States v. Powell, supra; Shasta Minerals Chemical Co. v. S.E.C., 328 F.2d 285 (10th Cir. 1964).”
 
Finally, the Intervenors argue that the Commission issued the subpoena to harass Robert H. Bomersbach as a result of a personal bias against him, and is, therefore, unlawful. Subpoena power can, of course, become the instrument of oppression and injustice. Endicott Johnson Corp. v. Perkins, 317 U.S. 501 (1943), (MURPHY, J., dissenting). And it is for the Court, on a petition to enforce, to determine whether the power is being so used. Shasta Minerals Chemicals Co. v. SEC, 328 F.2d 285 (10th Cir. 1964). ”
Edited by Calm
Link to comment

For those who would like to get to know more about Janet Russon, the so-called loopy “psychic” who is being sued along with Tim Ballard, here’s your chance to get to see her in action. Even though the interviewer is a rather unsophisticated, working class type guy, you’ll get to see and hear from the actual persona of the real Janet Russon as she actually is. And I will say that after viewing this video Russon does not at all appear to be the kooky, unhinged nut job she’s been portrayed to be in the media and on the discussion boards. It’s appears! obvious to me that she’s a genuine, decent, down to earth person.

It’s often amazing when you get to hear from those on the other side of accusatory stories and narratives that have been breathlessly splattered all over the media without the accused having the opportunity to present their side of the story, and this interview is a perfect case in point (please note that Tim Ballard and Janet Russon are presently unable to speak freely about their case due to legal constraints). But I must say that after viewing this video it seems likely that it’s going to be very difficult for the lawyers opposing Russom to portray her as a crackpot soothsayer.

 

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
50 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

For those who would like to get to know more about Janet Russon, the so-called loopy “psychic” who is being sued along with Tim Ballard, here’s your chance to get to see her in action. Even though the interviewer is a rather unsophisticated, working class type guy, you’ll get to see and hear from the actual persona of the real Janet Russon as she actually is. And I will say that after viewing this video Russon does not at all appear to be the kooky, unhinged nut job she’s been portrayed to be in the media and on the discussion boards. It’s appears! obvious to me that she’s a genuine, decent, down to earth person.

It’s often amazing when you get to hear from those on the other side of accusatory stories and narratives that have been breathlessly splattered all over the media without the accused having the opportunity to present their side of the story, and this interview is a perfect case in point (please note that Tim Ballard and Janet Russon are presently unable to speak freely about their case due to legal constraints). But I must say that after viewing this video it seems like likely that it’s going to be very difficult for the lawyers opposing Russom to portray her as a crackpot soothsayer.

 

Awhile back my local news did a story about using a psychic for finding missing persons and asked local several law enforcement how often they use psychics, and nearly all said zero. Seems to correlate to this article:

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/psychics-and-police-work

Plus, I don't mind Mediums or psychics. My niece is a Medium, the problem is how much money and time he spent with just her, clearly after all those hours spent Ballard and OUR could do other things. And many of these groups discounted the OUR group saying they were more a problem than a help to stop sex trafficking. https://julieroys.com/opinion-6-groups-fighting-human-trafficking-better-than-operation-underground-railroad/

Plus, I'm unsure of the facts that they have rescued as many kids as they say. Is there a place we can see that? I'll bet the answer is no, just like the article mentions, O.U.R, isn't transparent with this. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

the actual persona of the real Janet Russon as she actually is.

Was this made before or after the controversy hit the news? (Added:  Afterwards)

This is not what she actually is even if before (unless it is a hidden camera in her home), it is what she chooses to appear as in public at this time and perhaps some tidbits that slip through without her awareness.

It says she cannot talk about her lawsuit.  Does she talk about the psychic claims?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

video it seems likely that it’s going to be very difficult for the lawyers opposing Russom to portray her as a crackpot soothsayer.

They have a recording of one mission iirc that they used her for intel and some texts, so a lot depends on those, I am guessing.

Link to comment
On 12/7/2023 at 1:56 PM, teddyaware said:

For those who would like to get to know more about Janet Russon, the so-called loopy “psychic” who is being sued along with Tim Ballard, here’s your chance to get to see her in action. Even though the interviewer is a rather unsophisticated, working class type guy, you’ll get to see and hear from the actual persona of the real Janet Russon as she actually is. And I will say that after viewing this video Russon does not at all appear to be the kooky, unhinged nut job she’s been portrayed to be in the media and on the discussion boards. It’s appears! obvious to me that she’s a genuine, decent, down to earth person.

It’s often amazing when you get to hear from those on the other side of accusatory stories and narratives that have been breathlessly splattered all over the media without the accused having the opportunity to present their side of the story, and this interview is a perfect case in point (please note that Tim Ballard and Janet Russon are presently unable to speak freely about their case due to legal constraints). But I must say that after viewing this video it seems likely that it’s going to be very difficult for the lawyers opposing Russom to portray her as a crackpot soothsayer.

 

You’ve got to be kidding. 🙄

Link to comment
On 12/8/2023 at 3:36 PM, juliann said:

You’ve got to be kidding. 🙄

OK folks, here we go… Janet Russon, the so-called wacky “psychic” who plays a major the Tim Ballard controversy, provides the other side of the story. It’s obvious to me that either she’s a very intelligent, accomplished, honest and decent person, or she’s the ‘Queen of Sociopaths.’ Based on her presentation in this video, it appears that it’s going to be very difficult to portray her as a loopy nut job who was up to her neck in wickedness in a court of law.

I know many of you have already made up your minds on this matter — something that appears to ill advised and unseemly conduct for members of a church that is constantly mischaracterized and slandered — but why don’t give this video a fair hearing before further solidifying your conclusions on this matter? Be prepared for some very interesting revelations, including one on the putative “church statement” on Tim Ballard.

 

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

OK folks, here we go… Janet Russon, the so-called wacky “psychic” who plays a major the Tim Ballard controversy, provides the other side of the story. It’s obvious to me that either she’s a very intelligent, accomplished, honest and decent person, or she’s the ‘Queen of Sociopaths.’ Based on her presentation in this video, it appears that it’s going to be very difficult to portray her as a loopy nut job who was up to her neck in wickedness in a court of law.

I know many of you have already made up your minds on this matter — something that appears to ill advised and unseemly conduct for members of a church that is constantly mischaracterized and slandered — but why don’t give this video a fair hearing before further solidifying your conclusions on this matter? Be prepared for some very interesting revelations, including one on the putative “church statement” on Tim Ballard.

 

I'll watch, but are you forgetting the elephant in the room?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

The putative “church statement”? The one the Church released? You are downplaying the communications from the apostles in favor of a bunch of “Visions of Glory” apostates because they can appear sane in a controlled video?

Welcome to the Dark Side my apostate friend! We have cookies!

The same group as Chad and Lori Daybell.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

OK folks, here we go… Janet Russon, the so-called wacky “psychic” who plays a major the Tim Ballard controversy, provides the other side of the story. It’s obvious to me that either she’s a very intelligent, accomplished, honest and decent person, or she’s the ‘Queen of Sociopaths.’ Based on her presentation in this video, it appears that it’s going to be very difficult to portray her as a loopy nut job who was up to her neck in wickedness in a court of law.

I know many of you have already made up your minds on this matter — something that appears to ill advised and unseemly conduct for members of a church that is constantly mischaracterized and slandered — but why don’t give this video a fair hearing before further solidifying your conclusions on this matter? Be prepared for some very interesting revelations, including one on the putative “church statement” on Tim Ballard.

The Church has confirmed the release of the "putative 'church statement'" and did so quite a while ago.

As I've already pointed out to you, people who are effective conmen and conwomen are effective precisely because they are able to convince people of their "sincerity" and their "honesty." I do not believe you are applying nearly enough critical thinking to your evaluation of the evidence. In fact, your repeated posts on this topic seem to be born from motivated reasoning, more than anything else.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, ttribe said:

As I've already pointed out to you, people who are effective conmen and conwomen are effective precisely because they are able to convince people of their "sincerity" and their "honesty." I do not believe you are applying nearly enough critical thinking to your evaluation of the evidence. In fact, your repeated posts on this topic seem to be born from motivated reasoning, more than anything else.

I think this concept is simply lost on @teddyaware.  My guess is he is a big Firm Foundation as well as a Tim Ballard fan.  Likely susceptible to such things.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Be prepared for some very interesting revelations, including one on the putative “church statement” on Tim Ballard.

Summary please, especially if she discusses the psychic claims.

Quote

In response to Blaze News' request for answers regarding her work and her relationship with Ballard, Russon never denied being a psychic or communicating with spirits. In fact, her email sidestepped all questions regarding her supposed paranormal powers entirely, implying that answers to such questions would not "benefit" Blaze News' "audience."

https://www.theblaze.com/news/blaze-news-investigates-the-psychic-who-guided-tim-ballard-and-some-operation-underground-railroad-missions-for-years

Edited by Calm
Link to comment

“Putative “church statement””…can you explain what you mean by that?  Are you suggesting it isn’t really from the Church?  If so, why wasn’t that release disavowed?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Summary please, especially if she discusses the psychic claims.

I have not been following any of the details of this whole story other than a brief reading of a few of the posts made here from time to time, and reading a few of the news stories on KSL.  But having learned a few interesting tricks on Youtube in the last few months, I thought I'd try to help.

In Youtube recently, when you click on the "...more" link to expand a video's description, all the way at the bottom they now have a "Transcript" link, and it opens up an auto-generated transcript at the side of the video.  You can search the transcript there, but I selected the whole transcript and pasted it into Notepad, and then searched for the word "psychic".   (I prefer to do it in Notepad so that I can see a broader range of context).

There are two places where the word "psychic" is used in the entire two hour discussion (assuming the auto-generated transcript spells the words correctly - it often gets things wrong and sometimes in a humorous way).

The first time is when the woman is being introduced at the 3:10 mark, where the host says, "they call her the psychic but calls herself the sidekick, and I think others have given you that name".

The second time is at the 1:43:10 mark, but you need to back up before that point to get the context of what she's saying, but I think that is the part that you may be looking for.   She talks about the origin of the claim where "tens of thousands of dollars were spent on a psychic speaking to the deceased Prophet Nephi".  She says that story came from Troy Rollins, and that he wrongfully got into some of her emails through a "Google portal"(??), and both the host and the woman make Rollins out to be a liar.  But I don't think she describes the actual contents of her emails that I noticed.

I don't claim to have any understanding or interpretation of any of this, I'm just reporting what I found :) 

Edited by InCognitus
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...