sharilewis wrote:

---

I actually heard Mellow (John) was going to sue, but apparently Pilchesky beat him to the punch.

---

So you really didn't scoop anything, did you? You happened to get lucky on a bit of information that was suprising to approximately no one. And your information didn't even turn out to be accurate, did it? You must be very proud of yourself.

I won't call anything a scoop anymore, I'll just say it's an "early indication of a possible point of interest".

And it will be no more newsworthy than the sunrise prediction that I wasso accurate with. The old man is known as a "serial plantiff" because he files these things with such regularity that it's beyond pathetic anymore. A new Pilchesky filing no longer carries any news value.

His failing to file one, however....now that'd be news.

-- Edited by Paul at 15:15, 2007-07-08

wow.

She hasn't said anything to this point anyway. She's just recently taking less time in doing so is all.

::: Girl, I don't agree with Evans bringing people with her to a meeting either. But consider what started the bad blood. It wasn't her, it was him. ... :::

Let me just say, this is not 'bad blood' as you call it. It is politics. Just like Janet likes - fast and dirty. She shows up at his office - briefcase in one hand, latte in the other - they have a productive, albeit heated, meeting. And on Thursday she gets to give her long-winded and prejudiced rendition of what happened behind closed doors.

But - She show up at his office with a halfa shortbus in tow and he is supposed to swing open the doors and add to the lunacy? I don't think so. And on Thursday, she gets to give her long-winded and prejudiced rendition of what she thinks should have happened behind closed doors to the applause of the FULL shortbus. She gets to smack the left fist into the right palm and claim 'the doors were slammed in her face' ... and that 'the people' haven't been allowed to speak ... Ahhh, politics - fast and dirty - just the way she likes it.

::: ... Just like the unions. He started that too. Just like why DiBileo ran against him. DiBileo didn't start that feud either ... :::

WHAT feud ??? It isn't feuding - it's politics. This isn't the Hatfield's and the McCoy's. It's two parties with two different o-p-i-n-i-o-ns and making it difficult for the other side to 'win'. Applies to both the unions and to Dibileo.

Pfft, feuding.

Since there were posts here concerning Ken McDowell ... I thought it was a good place for this ... Now I have to ask ... why the hell would they give a link that is ... dead ... there is no important information when you click that link ... this poster makes it seem as though if you click it you will find some damaging DNA evidence at the other end ... and well that's just so CSI ... don't you all think ...

WARTHOG Posts: 35 Date: Mon Jul 16 1:38 PM, 2007 Views: 363

Quote | Reply RE: When will Kenny's testimony be posted? MistyMtTop wrote: CLICK HERE(edited to shrink link)-- Edited by Administrator at 10:27, 2007-07-15How many kiddies DOes he have? I heard three....two he actually claims as his. Gotta love DNA testing. __________________ Teeee Heeee Heeeee!!

and when you click on the link this is exactly what you get .... ohhhhh way to collect evidence ...

Sorry, there has been an Error on the web-site.

Please retry, or contact the Login Support Team for more information.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

Thank you for using the Child Support web-site at www.childsupport.state.pa.us.

*************************************************************

doesn't that just say it all ... enough said!

... and a jackass - don't forget jackass.

Joe Pilchesky Posts: 1200 Date: Sun Jul 22 11:57 AM, 2007 Views: 348

Quote | Reply RE: Judy violating our first ammendment rights Gatelli's demons will visit the podium soon. She, Fanucci and McGoff have a date with their past. They will have their summer break, and when they return, they return to face the words of the devil himself. They will be undressed for the cruel, two-faced, betraying, infidels that they are. The Times may protect, but that microphone will not. Each week for the first six weeks when they return, Gatelli will be served with a lawsuit on live TV, with a complete explanation of the lawsuit to the good people of the city of Scranton.

I don't think this is the sort of childish nonsense that his father-in-law and the rest of the boys were fighting to defend. What an embarassment.

This is simply Pilchesky saying "Look At Me", as his other serial lawsuits don't seem to be going anywhere and the Scranton Times hasn't had any pictures of him on page 3 in while.

I'm not an attorney (and unlike Joe Pilchesky, I don't play one on a message board either), but I'm hoping that his little spiel is immediately shut down as soon as he mentions the word 'lawsuit', as it wouldn't be prudent for anyone to comment on his antics anyway...that's assuming he actually goes through with this in the first place.

Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.

have his -- HAVE HIS ASS escorted out the door.
...cripes...

I can see it now ... He will get up there and he will begin to ask questions that she won't be allowed to answer due to the pending litigation ... and then he will say ... She won't answer his questions ... that's probably ... more likely than not ... is what will happen!

He is going with the clear intention (in my opinion) to disrupt not one but 6 meetings ...

Uh oh Clarence the residents are getting restless, what now??

Say it like it is Posts: 14 Date: Mon Jul 30 10:38 AM, 2007 Views: 27

Quote | Reply RE: A question for Joe about Janet Evans Questions for Joe, why did Castellani and Jamison have to file this last petition? How come you weren't all over it? Slipping or did you intentionally back off Cordaro. There's a rumor going around about 50K being put on the table. I'm sure you heard it. How much of a rumor is it and how much of it is true. You're the leader. I'm calling you out on this. I know you wouldn't want it any other way. Waiting.

You don't think they are starting to notice your distinct lack of wins, do you? What does it stand at now 1 for 30? Or maybe they are starting to notice your pick and choose method for who gets a pass who doesn't "Can't lay a glove on Evans"? Possibly they have done what we have done and looked back over past "predictions" and noticed they got nothing for their effort? Remember this fine prediction Joey?? Did you also notice the date by any chance? LOL LOL

Joe Pilchesky Posts: 1244 Date: Thu Oct 6 8:38 AM, 2005 Views: 447

Quote | Reply RE: Wanted: info on Hailstone THEY ALL FALL IN THE FALL If for no other reasons, because they're arrogant, sloppy and stupid.Growing up in those protected bubbles isn't working for them now, is it? These people don't know how to get out of their own way. The harder you push them, the more they lie and cry, the more they rely on manipulation and deceit. WE THE PEOPLE ARE TAKING THIS TOWN BACK, ANDWHAT DOHERTY HAS DONE, WITH THE IMMENSE HELP OF SARA HAILSTONE, WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN. HE EDUCATED US. I THANK HIM FOR THAT, BUT THE PRICE WAS A LITTLE HIGH. WE'LL ALL BE FINE IN THE END, BUT IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF THIS NAMEBRAND, USELESS POLITICAL PUPPET WON AGAIN. I-N-D-I-C-T-M-E-N-T-S IT'S ASSURED.

Well one thing is assured at least you are a jerk! LOL LOL

-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 11:21, 2007-07-30

Paul wrote:

---

I've said it before, and I'll repeat it, that anyone with a pending lawsuit against Council or one of its members should not be afforded the opportunity to speak before it. The Pilcheskys should not even be allowed in chambers.

---

Paul...I guess with that logic, Ms. Gatelli should not be allowed in chambers either, seeing how she is suing about a hundred or so Scranton Tax-Payers, right?...Jimbu15.

Paul said:

"that anyone with a pending lawsuit against Council ( as a whole) or one of its members (individually) should not be afforded the opportunity to speak before it."

Not if they just have a pending lawsuit. Mrs. Gatelli's lawsuit is not against Council or it's members. It's against Joey and his posters (unless of course Jan is poster ?). If you were involved in a lawsuit your attorney would not allow you to engage inany contact with other side and they would be prudent to tell you that, it would be for your best interest. Anyone with a pending lawsuit against city council should not be allowed to engage any of the other side in debate at the very least on the lawsuit, but no contact until the suit is resolved is probably best advise. For both sides.

-- Edited by IHavehadenoughofhaters at 11:23, 2007-07-31

Pilchesky brought the original suit against Council President Gatelli. She countersued. They should be kept seperated while she is doing city business. As long as the "hundred or so Scranton Tax-Payers" remain "anonymous", city business can't very well be halted (as if slowing down progress any more would even be noticable...) just because one of the speakers may be John Doe #56 or whatever. Your twisting of the logic doesn't work here. Pilchesky hasn't appeared at council lately, as far as I know, and defendants Doe #1-100 are still technically unknown. Therefore, I've only said the Pilchesky's shouldn't be allowed in chambers, to this point.

If I sued you for whatever reason, do you really think it's a good idea for me to knowingly appear at your place of work week in and week out, harping on the reasoning for my lawsuit? That probably borders on harassment.