Check out his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/GunnerAsch

The second item (as of this moment) on his page is his share of an item
from the Guardian (what?! gummer usually dismisses it as a commie rag)
about how someone is being prosecuted for an intemperate threatening
comment he made on his Facebook page. The story is interesting and
alarming:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tion?CMP=fb_us

Anyway, what's more interesting than that story is that Wieber seems to
be quite sensitive to it...as well he might be, given his history of
much worse threats and suggestions here.

On 5/20/2017 2:20 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Check out his Facebook page:
Stop socking up, tRudy:

11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a
discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from
USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from
William T.
Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here
below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your
correspondence with William Sessions.

[start- Jon to me]
Eat **** and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed
standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William
Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's
that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at
USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the
"meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail
address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,
http://www.fass.org/fasstrack/news_i...p?news_id=1152

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William"
To: jonball@[...]
Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim
standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the
standards have not been published in a final form for use. I
hope this information is helpful.
Please let me know if further information is needed.
Thanks,
William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message-----
From: jonball@[...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM
To: Sessions, William
Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen
many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find
anything to indicate if the standards were adopted.
Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance.
Jonathan Ball
Pasadena, CA
__________________________________________________ _
Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005 http://bit.ly/2cYknsh
[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan
Ball,
you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that
you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to
5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball http://bit.ly/1LFy9t8

and I won't die soon.

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't
go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon.
You ought to be very careful.

You certainly have no means to hasten my death.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old.
You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and
goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 4:21:00 PM UTC-4, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Check out his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/GunnerAsch

The second item (as of this moment) on his page is his share of an item
from the Guardian (what?! gummer usually dismisses it as a commie rag)
about how someone is being prosecuted for an intemperate threatening
comment he made on his Facebook page. The story is interesting and
alarming:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tion?CMP=fb_us

Anyway, what's more interesting than that story is that Wieber seems to
be quite sensitive to it...as well he might be, given his history of
much worse threats and suggestions here.

It's a strange commentary that the Guardian article seems to think that threatening to kill someone is a first-amendment issue -- as long as it's on social media.

Fortunately, prosecutors don't agree. Gunner is treading on much thinner ice than he seems to realize. For that matter, Larry, who has openly advocated threatening elected representatives with guns, clearly has crossed the line and is liable to prosecution for a felony.

Court cases have gone both ways on this issue, but chancing that you won't run into one that takes a dim view of thinly-veiled threats is a fool's choice.

--
Ed Huntress

On 5/20/2017 2:57 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 4:21:00 PM UTC-4, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Check out his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/GunnerAsch

The second item (as of this moment) on his page is his share of an item
from the Guardian (what?! gummer usually dismisses it as a commie rag)
about how someone is being prosecuted for an intemperate threatening
comment he made on his Facebook page. The story is interesting and
alarming:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tion?CMP=fb_us

Anyway, what's more interesting than that story is that Wieber seems to
be quite sensitive to it...as well he might be, given his history of
much worse threats and suggestions here.

It's a strange commentary that the Guardian article seems to think that threatening to kill someone is a first-amendment issue -- as long as it's on social media.

First of all, the idiot didn't threaten to kill anyone - he advocated
burning down the cop's house, not necessarily with the cop and his
family in it. It's debatable that he really meant it as a threat; it
was an expression of his anger - well justified, in my opinion - at the
cop's brutality.


Fortunately, prosecutors don't agree. Gunner is treading on much thinner ice than he seems to realize. For that matter, Larry, who has openly advocated threatening elected representatives with guns, clearly has crossed the line and is liable to prosecution for a felony.

I haven't seen Larry's threats, but it wouldn't surprise me. You're
right about Wieber's, though. They are directed at specific people and
hint at knowing locations. They're much more direct.

Court cases have gone both ways on this issue, but chancing that you won't run into one that takes a dim view of thinly-veiled threats is a fool's choice.

I think Wieber may be, finally, developing a sense of that.

On 5/20/2017 2:57 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 4:21:00 PM UTC-4, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Check out his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/GunnerAsch

The second item (as of this moment) on his page is his share of an item
from the Guardian (what?! gummer usually dismisses it as a commie rag)
about how someone is being prosecuted for an intemperate threatening
comment he made on his Facebook page. The story is interesting and
alarming:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tion?CMP=fb_us

Anyway, what's more interesting than that story is that Wieber seems to
be quite sensitive to it...as well he might be, given his history of
much worse threats and suggestions here.

It's a strange commentary that the Guardian article seems to think that threatening to kill someone is a first-amendment issue -- as long as it's on social media.

Fortunately, prosecutors don't agree. Gunner is treading on much thinner ice than he seems to realize. For that matter, Larry, who has openly advocated threatening elected representatives with guns, clearly has crossed the line and is liable to prosecution for a felony.

Court cases have gone both ways on this issue, but chancing that you won't run into one that takes a dim view of thinly-veiled threats is a fool's choice.


Now Terrell has jumped in on Wieber's FB page. This is getting good!

On 5/20/2017 4:47 PM, Matt Singer wrote:
Now Terrell has jumped in on Wieber's FB page. This is getting good!


Stop socking up, tRudy:

11 years ago, while posting under this current nym, Rudy Canoza, we had a
discussion about a revised marketing claim concerning grass-fed beef from
USDA. You claimed that you had written to and received a reply from
William T.
Sessions, Associate Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed Program. Here
below is the post you wrote using the nym Rudy Canoza containing your
correspondence with William Sessions.

[start- Jon to me]
Eat **** and bark at the moon, Dreck - the proposed
standard has NOT been adopted. I wrote to William
Sessions, the associate deputy administrator (how's
that for a title) at the Livestock and Seed Program at
USDA that is in charge of writing the standard for the
"meat marketing claims"; his name, title and e-mail
address are at a web page whose URL I gave yesterday,
http://www.fass.org/fasstrack/news_i...p?news_id=1152

Here's his reply:

From: "Sessions, William"
To: jonball@[...]
Mr. Ball: Thanks for your message. The marketing claim
standards are still under review by USDA. Accordingly, the
standards have not been published in a final form for use. I
hope this information is helpful.
Please let me know if further information is needed.
Thanks,
William T. Sessions
Associate Deputy Administrator
Livestock and Seed Program

-----Original Message-----
From: jonball@[...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 11:38 AM
To: Sessions, William
Subject: 2003 proposed standards for meat marketing claims

I have read about the proposed standards, and I've seen
many of the public comments sent to USDA. I cannot find
anything to indicate if the standards were adopted.
Were the standards as proposed in 2003 adopted?

Thanks in advance.
Jonathan Ball
Pasadena, CA
__________________________________________________ _
Jonathan Ball aka Rudy Canoza 08 Sep 2005 http://bit.ly/2cYknsh
[end]

Jonathan Ball. Pasadena, CA. Priceless! That email, posted from Jonathan
Ball,
you, and the return email sent to Jonathan Ball proves beyond all doubt that
you are Jonathan Ball. Of course, you don't live in Pasadena since moving to
5327 Shepard Ave Sacramento, CA 95819-1731

Here's the proof Jonathan D Ball http://bit.ly/1LFy9t8

and I won't die soon.

Yeah you will. You're an old man who hasn't looked after himself. I wouldn't
go around goading people if I was as small and as puny as you are, liar Jon.
You ought to be very careful.

You certainly have no means to hasten my death.

Are you really serious, weed? you're just over 5 feet tall and 64 years old.
You'll be 65 on December 2nd. You've got to stop threatening people and
goading them to come after you. You're pathetic.


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On 5/20/2017 3:51 PM, Terron Musgrave wrote:
On 5/20/2017 4:47 PM, Matt Singer wrote:
Now Terrell has jumped in on Wieber's FB page. This is getting good!


Stop

Hello, Poxed Pee-Pee! Why are you posting as "terron musgrave" (and
"Schuman" and "Phil Laundry" and "andy memory") and using discredited
bull**** from Derek Nash?

On 5/20/2017 2:57 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 4:21:00 PM UTC-4, Rudy Canoza wrote:
Check out his Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/GunnerAsch

The second item (as of this moment) on his page is his share of an item
from the Guardian (what?! gummer usually dismisses it as a commie rag)
about how someone is being prosecuted for an intemperate threatening
comment he made on his Facebook page. The story is interesting and
alarming:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...tion?CMP=fb_us

Anyway, what's more interesting than that story is that Wieber seems to
be quite sensitive to it...as well he might be, given his history of
much worse threats and suggestions here.

It's a strange commentary that the Guardian article seems to think that threatening to kill someone is a first-amendment issue -- as long as it's on social media.

Fortunately, prosecutors don't agree. Gunner is treading on much thinner ice than he seems to realize. For that matter, Larry, who has openly advocated threatening elected representatives with guns, clearly has crossed the line and is liable to prosecution for a felony.

Court cases have gone both ways on this issue, but chancing that you won't run into one that takes a dim view of thinly-veiled threats is a fool's choice.


I thought you might be interested to know that Michael Terrell has now
deleted his comments from Wieber's Facebook post about the guy being
prosecuted for unlawful threats.