^ ^ Which is very telling, isn't it ? ^ ^ If the salacious material floated on our md'ing social media had any merit (ie.: If it were true and defensible ), then ... gee, you would think that would have been EAGERLY introduced into his legal pursuits. HHhhhmmmm
Exactly. Recall back this summer when he motioned the court to put Lead FBI Agent Archer under oath and question him. His
PUBLIC rationale for this (meaning Facebook, TreasureNet, Interviews etc) was that
the FBI was forging and deleting evidence and that he had ironclad "proof" the FBI dug at night and removed several tons of gold under cover of darkness.
Now, if he actually had strong, tangible evidence that the FBI FOUND gold, FORGED EVIDENCE and DELETED evidence, it would have guaranteed him to win his motion. However, his actual
LEGAL filings didn't contain any such evidence of forging, deleting, digging at night, or recovering even one ounce of gold. Nor did he even accuse the FBI of forging evidence or finding and removing 9 tons of gold under cover of darkness.
Why didn't he introduce this evidence to the court he publicly claimed he had, evidence that would have guaranteed him victory in depositioning under oath the lead FBI Agent? Because, he doesn't have any! When it came to the actual litigation,
where lying will get you counter sued and in legal trouble for perjury, they only accused the FBI of vexatious litigation (legal action which is brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary) and concealing evidence. They didn't even have any evidence the FBI was hiding anything, just accusations, hence why they lost their motion.
I've been meaning to do a write up on this motion which centered around the "missing" video, that details Plaintiffs accusations and the DOJ's response, so I'll do a write up on it when I have time over the next week.