This is a really great connection but my Sidley Austin links aren't yielding much...
In 1963, former postmaster general J. Edward Day left the administration of President John F. Kennedy to establish the firm's Washington, D.C. office.
In 1972, the firm merged with the 50 lawyers of Chicago firm Leibman, Williams, Bennett, Baird & Minow. Additional offices were then established in London, Los Angeles, Singapore and New York. Following the merger, Washington D.C. partner Day resigned and later sued the firm, In a 1974 lawsuit, Day alleged that the merger represented a "breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, fraud and misrepresentation, conspiracy, wrongful dissolution or ouster of co-partner and breach of partnership agreement." The suit was later dismissed with prejudice.[12]
^ Hmm, hostile takeover in 1972?
In 2001, the firm merged with Brown & Wood, a New York-based law firm established in 1914 with 400 attorneys and additional domestic offices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco and Los Angeles and overseas branches in London, Beijing and Hong Kong (where it practiced English law in addition to U.S. law). Brown & Wood was known for its securities, structured finance and securitization practices. Brown & Wood had offices in the World Trade Center on floors 54 and 56-59.[13]
9/11 connection?
Sidley & Austin was among several law firms caught up in the Savings & Loan Crisis and paid $7.5 million to settle legal malpractice claims stemming from its representation of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association.
Sidley Austin was supposedly on retainer for NXIVM, according to a comment I saw on here. I've only been able to find one post about this via Yandex and a few others from a website called frankreport.com and it merely lists law firms on retainers.
With Vance's background being mingling with the 'enemy' it's going to be harder to find things and separate the signal from the noise.
There was a Lincoln Savings and Loan Association in my county seat in the '80's, so I looked it up. First sentence of Wikipedia mentions "Keating Five", and there is "No Name".
Maybe nothing, but: Is everything "corrupt" one step away from "No Name"?
Sidley Austin LLP is an American multinational law firm with approximately 2,300 lawyers in 21 offices worldwide. It was established in 1866 and its headquarters is at One South Dearborn in Chicago's Loop.[1] It is one of the largest law firms in the world in terms of revenue. Among its alumni are former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama.[8]
Barry and Big Mike are alumni… interesting.
A new biography about Michelle Obama discusses in detail what she didn’t like about her job, early in her career, as an associate attorney at Sidley Austin.
Ambitious and eager for responsibility, she found a number of assignments unexciting, reports the Chicago Sun-Times, summarizing a lengthy Sunday magazine article in the Washington Post by author Liza Mundy. Plus, more so than most associates, Obama, whose name at the time was Michelle Robinson, didn’t hesitate to push hard for better work.
“Not many people went over my head,” recalls Quincy White, a now-retired partner at Sidley who headed the firm’s marketing practice at the time. But Robinson did, complaining to Sidley’s human resources department.
He and an HR representative talked, agreeing that Robinson, essentially, was “complaining that she’s being treated like she’s a second-year associate,” recounts an excerpt from Mundy’s book, titled simply Michelle. Says White: “I couldn’t give her something that would meet her sense of ambition to change the world.”
Focusing on her career, the 25-year-old had told her mother, in the summer of 1989, that she wasn’t going to worry about dating, the Post article says. But then she was assigned to mentor Barack Obama, who was a 27-year-old law student and summer associate at the time.
Today, of course, he is the Democratic presidential nominee, and Michelle Obama is his wife of nearly 16 years.
In 2001, the firm merged with Brown & Wood, a New York-based law firm established in 1914 with 400 attorneys and additional domestic offices in Washington, D.C., San Francisco and Los Angeles and overseas branches in London, Beijing and Hong Kong (where it practiced English law in addition to U.S. law). Brown & Wood was known for its securities, structured finance and securitization practices. Brown & Wood had offices in the World Trade Center on floors 54 and 56-59.[13]
And there is is… 9/11 WTC connection… very interesting…
In an effort to bulk up in a period of strong law firm consolidation, Brown & Wood explored a merger with fellow New York firm White & Case in 1998, but these talks were described as "preliminary in nature." Brown & Wood eventually merged with Sidley & Austin in 2001. Shortly thereafter, the legacy Brown & Wood's offices in the World Trade Center were destroyed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.[3] The firm relocated its New York operations to midtown Manhattan.
Brown & Wood notable attorney..
Charles Li – Chinese banker, former CEO of Hong Kong Stock Exchange
In 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that Charles Li, while he was chairman of JP Morgan China from 2003 to 2009, recommended hiring the children and associates of Chinese officials, clients and potential future clients. At the time, JP Morgan was investigated by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the US Department of Justice into possible violation of anti-bribery laws by improperly hiring relatives of Chinese officials, known as "princelings", to win business.[2]
He was back then, but since then he has become close with Don Jr and has repeatedly said he has changed his opinion on Trump. He seems to be one of the more maga candidates in the senate.
I always have to stop and remember that I went from a genuine leftist to a patriotic conservative in under two years. It can and does happen every day. Doesn't mean it has here, but I can't just dismiss the possibility.
I get the feeling he was leaning left in order to rub shoulders necessary for a successful book release (multi-million dollars). When the Netflix Hillybilly Elegy was snubbed by critics, that was the final straw for him.
With that being said, is he a Senator today without that book, and the rise in status that came with it?
Confirmed on Hannity last night. Correct.
Hannity grilled him on everything he said years ago and Vance said he needs to face and answer for what he said, so he explained everything.
Scholars apparently put the time line for Paul becoming Jesus' most powerful apostle as being between 4 and 7 years after the Crucifixion.
Hmmmm....
(Not implying any spiritual significance here, just that someone who was once a total never-Jesuser ended up becoming one of the greatest pro-Jesus guys around.)
I am willing to grant that 4-7 years is enough time for maturity and change in relation to opinions and beliefs once held.
A lot can change in 4-7 years.
A fat man can become lean and chiseled.
A country can go from prosperous to an economic crisis.
But there's going to be adversity for the person or thing changing, in this case -- and especially compounded by D.C. backstabbing -- people will question his motives and present beliefs. They are right to do so, too.
But this is the hand we were dealt and all we can do is hope for the best. Anyone saying they won't vote for this ticket is, frankly, not in a sound state of mind considering the alternative.
How many people on this board think this Biden “optics” term was necessary?
It sure seems like it was.
If Pence doesn’t “Judas”, whether strategically for good, or compromisingly for bad, we don’t have this term.
In the meantime, whether he was good or bad, he seems to have worked with and not against us.
Therefore, either way, he was the right pick.
Why did Jesus pick Judas? He knew what Judas was going to do.
He had to end up on the cross, and it could not be by his own hand.
There had to be a matching scapegoat to send out into the wilderness and die.
In the meantime, he had to work with the apostles and not seem to work against.
I’m sure there are other ways this case could be made, not to say Trump is Jesus (plenty of people have trouble with metaphors), but that it’s funny how these things just “work out”. Almost like someone who knows better than us is directing this movie, and has been all along.
The idea of working with people who you dont agree with is one thing BUT to work with people who you KNOW will betray as a means to serve a greater good is not an experience that MOST average people undertake or can understand.
If Michael Obama didn't like working for them then that's something. But then there's not much he does seem to like besides having his chefs make dips to die for.
Some of the other law firms Mr. Raniere has retained include: Proskauer Rose; Luibrand Law; Olsen & Watts; Nolan & Heller; Sidley Austin; Tompkins McGuire Wachenfeld & Barry; Drinker Biddle & Reath; Judd Burstein; Harris Beach; Damon Morey; Bartolomei & Associates; Latham & Watkins; Mays & Associates; and Lynch & Lynch.
Rich people / corporations keep several law firms on retainer at any given time. I'm not saying there isn't a link, just that it's a weak one based on the information provided.
What is happening now, is that the Q post is applied in this time. Of course multiple meanings may exist. It is just good practice to consider things from all angles, to get the picture .....
That said: there is an intricate relationship between the practitioners of "law" (BAR), The corporate USA, and politicians .....who create statutes that can be practiced by BAR members.
Law is not difficult. Statues (legality) are and provide for the enslavement of the people by banking and debt, regulatory requirements (administrative state), lobbyists and 501c' s which ties into the IRS -> FED construct, which ties into Wallstreet and the parabolic nature of money creation.
As Paul Cliteur claims: it is not a matter of lack of trust, but trusting too much.
As Sleepy already pointed out in his Harris vs Biden article, VP position is to counterbalance POTUS against competing interests.
Vance looks so far as DS pick as it can get.
It also means that instead of "eliminate DT from the race at any means possible" the cabal yielded and now accepts Trump as next president. They had their shot, and they failed, now they have to cope and get a hit in turn. This is like a saying "ok, ok, you won. But we'll need our own man as well, otherwise it will not work out".
It's hard for me to put much importance on this type of thing when looking at it objectively.
If it was some little obscure law practice or other business then it might have been significant.
But it's a large, global and prestigious law firm that's over 150 years old. I'm sure if someone took the time to look into it there could be hundreds of connections between it and Trump.
Law practices and politics go hand in hand. I would wager that there are more former lawyers in Congress than any other occupation. The lawyers who are elected to Congress are high achievers who work at prestigious law firms so it's not out of the ordinary for them to work at Sidley Austin. Michelle Obama worked there and when this Q post was dropped most Anons associated it with her.
This is one thing I find so frustrating about Q drops. Don't get me wrong, I love Q and I think he/they have done much to shine a light on evil doings of the world. But so many of his posts are just too vague to do much with and I end up feeling like I've wasted time trying to find the meaning to it. And much of it is completely subjective to how someone interprets it, anyway. One of the things I like to do is read back over old posts and see how ideas have changed as to what the Q posts mean. Something what would have gotten you a ban for saying 2 years ago becomes a commonly held theory, and vice versa.
This is a really great connection but my Sidley Austin links aren't yielding much...
^ Hmm, hostile takeover in 1972?
9/11 connection?
^ Savings & loan crisis connection
Sidley Austin was supposedly on retainer for NXIVM, according to a comment I saw on here. I've only been able to find one post about this via Yandex and a few others from a website called frankreport.com and it merely lists law firms on retainers.
With Vance's background being mingling with the 'enemy' it's going to be harder to find things and separate the signal from the noise.
Maybe he is whybwe know about nxim
Who knows where the bodies are buried?
He also clerked for justices kavanaugh and Roberts. I hope he is a good guy that knows where the skeletons are and doesn’t have some himself.
There was a Lincoln Savings and Loan Association in my county seat in the '80's, so I looked it up. First sentence of Wikipedia mentions "Keating Five", and there is "No Name".
Maybe nothing, but: Is everything "corrupt" one step away from "No Name"?
Good digs
https://commongroundscorecard.org/jd-vance/
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/vance-vp-pick-prompts-career-questions-for-his-trial-lawyer-wife
JD Vance also is a Yale Law graduate and worked as a litigation associate at Sidley Austin from October 2014 to May 2015.
I don't know if that is a significant link - he worked there for 8 months as an associate (junior) employee. Plus, the company is enormous...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidley_Austin
Barry and Big Mike are alumni… interesting.
Ambitious and eager for responsibility, she found a number of assignments unexciting, reports the Chicago Sun-Times, summarizing a lengthy Sunday magazine article in the Washington Post by author Liza Mundy. Plus, more so than most associates, Obama, whose name at the time was Michelle Robinson, didn’t hesitate to push hard for better work.
“Not many people went over my head,” recalls Quincy White, a now-retired partner at Sidley who headed the firm’s marketing practice at the time. But Robinson did, complaining to Sidley’s human resources department.
He and an HR representative talked, agreeing that Robinson, essentially, was “complaining that she’s being treated like she’s a second-year associate,” recounts an excerpt from Mundy’s book, titled simply Michelle. Says White: “I couldn’t give her something that would meet her sense of ambition to change the world.”
Focusing on her career, the 25-year-old had told her mother, in the summer of 1989, that she wasn’t going to worry about dating, the Post article says. But then she was assigned to mentor Barack Obama, who was a 27-year-old law student and summer associate at the time.
Today, of course, he is the Democratic presidential nominee, and Michelle Obama is his wife of nearly 16 years.
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/what_michelle_obama_didnt_like_about_working_at_sidley_austin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_%26_Wood
And there is is… 9/11 WTC connection… very interesting…
In an effort to bulk up in a period of strong law firm consolidation, Brown & Wood explored a merger with fellow New York firm White & Case in 1998, but these talks were described as "preliminary in nature." Brown & Wood eventually merged with Sidley & Austin in 2001. Shortly thereafter, the legacy Brown & Wood's offices in the World Trade Center were destroyed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.[3] The firm relocated its New York operations to midtown Manhattan.
Brown & Wood notable attorney.. Charles Li – Chinese banker, former CEO of Hong Kong Stock Exchange
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Li
In 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that Charles Li, while he was chairman of JP Morgan China from 2003 to 2009, recommended hiring the children and associates of Chinese officials, clients and potential future clients. At the time, JP Morgan was investigated by the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the US Department of Justice into possible violation of anti-bribery laws by improperly hiring relatives of Chinese officials, known as "princelings", to win business.[2]
Princelings….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princelings
Notable princelings… Xi Jinping
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xi_Jinping
In 1963, former postmaster general J. Edward Day left the administration of President John F. Kennedy to establish the firm's Washington, D.C. office.
Every time there's a estimated number given, like "approximately 2,300" employee, I look it up :).
u/#q2300
Two years younger than Obama and assigned to "mentor" him??
I didn't even realize Mike was older...
Was he a never Trumper in 2017?
He was back then, but since then he has become close with Don Jr and has repeatedly said he has changed his opinion on Trump. He seems to be one of the more maga candidates in the senate.
I always have to stop and remember that I went from a genuine leftist to a patriotic conservative in under two years. It can and does happen every day. Doesn't mean it has here, but I can't just dismiss the possibility.
I get the feeling he was leaning left in order to rub shoulders necessary for a successful book release (multi-million dollars). When the Netflix Hillybilly Elegy was snubbed by critics, that was the final straw for him.
With that being said, is he a Senator today without that book, and the rise in status that came with it?
sounds like a great book deal
True. I didn't give two craps about trump until he told hillary she would be in jail if he was the president in the debates v
Confirmed on Hannity last night. Correct. Hannity grilled him on everything he said years ago and Vance said he needs to face and answer for what he said, so he explained everything.
Also keep in mind that he is still pretty young (39 now)... so his views were evolving during his 30's. Been there, done that, myself.
Plus, all the scumbag people hate his guts, which is good enough for me.
Everyone grows up right? Ok, not everyone, but most
I'm not a Hannity fan but that's impressive.
Same, but sadly too many normies still glued to their TV mouthpieces.
Apparently. 2017 ..... 2024. Hmmm....
Scholars apparently put the time line for Paul becoming Jesus' most powerful apostle as being between 4 and 7 years after the Crucifixion.
Hmmmm....
(Not implying any spiritual significance here, just that someone who was once a total never-Jesuser ended up becoming one of the greatest pro-Jesus guys around.)
I am willing to grant that 4-7 years is enough time for maturity and change in relation to opinions and beliefs once held.
A lot can change in 4-7 years.
A fat man can become lean and chiseled.
A country can go from prosperous to an economic crisis.
But there's going to be adversity for the person or thing changing, in this case -- and especially compounded by D.C. backstabbing -- people will question his motives and present beliefs. They are right to do so, too.
But this is the hand we were dealt and all we can do is hope for the best. Anyone saying they won't vote for this ticket is, frankly, not in a sound state of mind considering the alternative.
I can understand the hesitation, especially since Pence seemed trustworthy and then became Judas to sell out the U.S. to the stolen election.
I am CAUTIOUSLY optimistic but trust only TRUMP as of yet.
How many people on this board think this Biden “optics” term was necessary?
It sure seems like it was.
If Pence doesn’t “Judas”, whether strategically for good, or compromisingly for bad, we don’t have this term.
In the meantime, whether he was good or bad, he seems to have worked with and not against us.
Therefore, either way, he was the right pick.
Why did Jesus pick Judas? He knew what Judas was going to do.
He had to end up on the cross, and it could not be by his own hand.
There had to be a matching scapegoat to send out into the wilderness and die.
In the meantime, he had to work with the apostles and not seem to work against.
I’m sure there are other ways this case could be made, not to say Trump is Jesus (plenty of people have trouble with metaphors), but that it’s funny how these things just “work out”. Almost like someone who knows better than us is directing this movie, and has been all along.
Insightful!
VERY!!!
makes sense......
The idea of working with people who you dont agree with is one thing BUT to work with people who you KNOW will betray as a means to serve a greater good is not an experience that MOST average people undertake or can understand.
Paul was Saul. Saul was not a good, or Godly, man. So yes miracles can happen quickly.
What does that really mean, though? Let’s entertain that he is a mole; he would need to make it convincing…
If Michael Obama didn't like working for them then that's something. But then there's not much he does seem to like besides having his chefs make dips to die for.
https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3274386
Rich people / corporations keep several law firms on retainer at any given time. I'm not saying there isn't a link, just that it's a weak one based on the information provided.
Time context.
What is happening now, is that the Q post is applied in this time. Of course multiple meanings may exist. It is just good practice to consider things from all angles, to get the picture .....
That said: there is an intricate relationship between the practitioners of "law" (BAR), The corporate USA, and politicians .....who create statutes that can be practiced by BAR members.
Law is not difficult. Statues (legality) are and provide for the enslavement of the people by banking and debt, regulatory requirements (administrative state), lobbyists and 501c' s which ties into the IRS -> FED construct, which ties into Wallstreet and the parabolic nature of money creation.
As Paul Cliteur claims: it is not a matter of lack of trust, but trusting too much.
As Sleepy already pointed out in his Harris vs Biden article, VP position is to counterbalance POTUS against competing interests. Vance looks so far as DS pick as it can get. It also means that instead of "eliminate DT from the race at any means possible" the cabal yielded and now accepts Trump as next president. They had their shot, and they failed, now they have to cope and get a hit in turn. This is like a saying "ok, ok, you won. But we'll need our own man as well, otherwise it will not work out".
Real enemies have to deal with shared practical realities and limitations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/opinion/barack-obama-and-me.html J.D. wrote this piece for the New York Times. It's interesting how people can change in 4-7 years like mentioned in the comments above..
archived/non-paywall version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20170102203312/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/opinion/barack-obama-and-me.html
Uh huh...I'm just gonna leave this here...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MVUV3J4NcmJk
Who’s Vance’s AIPAC buddy?
Yeah I saw pics of him at the wailing wall..
I saw pics of Trump at the wailing wall too
Yep .. Let's see what happens !
It's like Walter sobchiek says, "You don't just stop... being jewish..." 😁
It's hard for me to put much importance on this type of thing when looking at it objectively.
If it was some little obscure law practice or other business then it might have been significant.
But it's a large, global and prestigious law firm that's over 150 years old. I'm sure if someone took the time to look into it there could be hundreds of connections between it and Trump.
Law practices and politics go hand in hand. I would wager that there are more former lawyers in Congress than any other occupation. The lawyers who are elected to Congress are high achievers who work at prestigious law firms so it's not out of the ordinary for them to work at Sidley Austin. Michelle Obama worked there and when this Q post was dropped most Anons associated it with her.
This is one thing I find so frustrating about Q drops. Don't get me wrong, I love Q and I think he/they have done much to shine a light on evil doings of the world. But so many of his posts are just too vague to do much with and I end up feeling like I've wasted time trying to find the meaning to it. And much of it is completely subjective to how someone interprets it, anyway. One of the things I like to do is read back over old posts and see how ideas have changed as to what the Q posts mean. Something what would have gotten you a ban for saying 2 years ago becomes a commonly held theory, and vice versa.
Who would’ve thought to make that connection?! Interesting too that Sidley Austin might be purposely being thrown into the spotlight….
My first question about the this post is how did J.D. enter private practice working for a law firm? Wouldn't it be one or the other?
the law firm was a private practice...?