Letusnamenames

United States

#142 Apr 22, 2013
Ha Ha wrote:
<quoted text>
And I think you irrationally defend the indefensible. It must be wonderful living in blissful ignorance as you do!
At least I'm not the delusional one thinking I would win a mayoral election. That's blissful ignorance at its best!
Rob Rosenfeld

Saint Louis, MO

#143 Apr 22, 2013
I'm not going to jump through your hoops. The signatures of RUby Massey on the April and June 2004 NID petitions were different and the forgery was established during the litigation process. You can find the pleadings and those petitions are exhibits- if you really want to. If there is an investigation all will be shared althought the City already has everything on this issue.

At this point the most significant part of the forgery issue relates to the fact that Sweeney admitted in his deposition that he never investigated the forgery allegation nor did he inform anyone in the CIty council or government about this allegation after it was first made in 2008, although one would think the CIty council should have been informed while considering legislation to give me a 280,000 bill for the bridge based on the forged document, or whether to make a more reasonable settlement with me, continue litigation, etc. Sweeney was also the attorney for the WInklers, and the fact that he did not tell the City that the NID submitted by Mr. Winkler contained a forgery and perjury certainly ties into his conflict of interest.
Bored

Saint Louis, MO

#144 Apr 22, 2013
I thought you said you had agreed to a settlement, and the situation is settled.
Why are you continuing to attack the City?
Letusnamenames

United States

#145 Apr 22, 2013
I like that, no proof posted and the word "if" as in "if" there is an investigation.

More allegations with no proof posted. Enough said.
Letusnamenames

United States

#146 Apr 22, 2013
In my opinion I thing he feels like he still has an ax to grind. I don't think he will be happy until he runs this city (of which he is not a resident) into the ground with the other conspiracy theorists we have. Oh wait, one of those don't live here either.

I thought he said that he signed a no disclosure agreement with the city. Would bad mouthing the city or continuing to make them look bad be part of that agreement?
Rob Rosenfeld

Saint Louis, MO

#147 Apr 22, 2013
Letusnamenames you say in your opinion Im crying wolf and I want to run the CIty into the ground- what is the basis of those opinions? Suppose I could prove all my allegations, would you change your tune?

I have been through a lot at the hands of dishonest, unscrupulous government officials. Any normal, decent person would want to see such officials removed from a position where they could continue to harm the public. I would like to see that occur in any city or state or at the federal level, but I happen to have gotten enmeshed in the politics of this city and I would like to see this CIty operate properly. You keep going on about me not living there, but I do own a business there. For that matter I'd like to see the government in North Korea cleaned up too even though I dont live and work there.

The interesting question is who are you and what is it that you want? Do you think its perfectly fine if CIty officials march into court and lie under oath as part of the job? Is it just fine with you if the City attorney maintains conflicts of interests which affect his ability to properly represent the City?

You think its OK i candidates for office who aren't allies of the CIty attorney get tossed off the ballot for trumped up reasons?

Do you think its OK that the City spent all this money on this ridiculous bridge? Don't you want know more facts about how that happened and who was responsible?

I can justify why I dont want to see dishonest unscrupulous government- whats your argument in favor?
Shell Yeah

Arnold, MO

#148 Apr 22, 2013
Bored wrote:
I thought you said you had agreed to a settlement, and the situation is settled.
Why are you continuing to attack the City?
How is wanting the truth to be known attacking the city? If the city didn't do anything wrong, there wouldn't have been a problem. When a cop pulls you over for speeding, do you attack the cop and tell him he is overstepping his bounds? Why don't you start respecting the people who point out the wrongdoing that is going on in this town instead of attacking them for calling it to your attention? The actions taken by the city more often than not recently are illegal, pointing out illegal dealings is not what needs to be stopped, it is the illegal dealings that need to be stopped. Your method of saying it isn't so, burying your head in the sand and attacking the messengers isn't going to last much longer.
Letusnamenames

United States

#149 Apr 22, 2013
I see a lot of allegations and no proof posted. Where's the proof? I gave you the options and a good avenue to get it posted yet all you do is argue and demand to know who I am. Post the proof.

And by the way, the citizens voted to keep that corrupt government. You are not a citizen of Arnold and can't vote.
Rob rosenfeld

United States

#150 Apr 22, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
I see a lot of allegations and no proof posted. Where's the proof? I gave you the options and a good avenue to get it posted yet all you do is argue and demand to know who I am. Post the proof.
And by the way, the citizens voted to keep that corrupt government. You are not a citizen of Arnold and can't vote.
Hey I don't live in Arnold great point hadn't heard that before

You must be working in the Arnold government. There's no other explanation
OMG Fools Abound

Arnold, MO

#151 Apr 22, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
I see a lot of allegations and no proof posted. Where's the proof? I gave you the options and a good avenue to get it posted yet all you do is argue and demand to know who I am. Post the proof.
And by the way, the citizens voted to keep that corrupt government. You are not a citizen of Arnold and can't vote.
You see nothing. A deaf, dumb and blind person sees more than you do. The proof is everywhere, you refuse to acknowledge it. Do you have anything more than air in that head of yours? It seems a corrupt government is good in your opinion. Hopefully people will see the light soon.
Letusnamenames

United States

#152 Apr 22, 2013
Rob,

Wrong. Everyone on here knows my profession and it isn't in the city government. You know what they say about assuming.

I'm just a citizen that is tired of all of you crying corruption and never supplying the proof. What really irks me is all of the out of town people trying to tell the citizens they are wrong. You don't live here so you can't say what is right or wrong. The citizens voted and made their choice. We have to live with it, you don't. We just want people like you to quit criticizing our votes and to leave us alone and butt out.

Fools Abound,

Then post the proof. None has been posted on here. Post it. Work with Rob and get it posted. I doubt you will though because you never post it and when you do post something it has nothing to do with Arnold. I'm really starting to believe their is no proof. Prove me wrong and post it.
Letusnamenames

United States

#153 Apr 22, 2013
Where's the proof?
OMG Fools Abound

Arnold, MO

#154 Apr 22, 2013
Take a long walk of a short pier. People keep telling you to do that and you never do. Why not? What is wrong with you? Why can't you just do what you are asked over and over again?
Rob rosenfeld

United States

#155 Apr 22, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
Where's the proof?
What proof are you lacking? Were Mullins and missey on the ballot? You've said I got a sweetheart deal but There was nothing wrong with ozark nid and I was going to lose? How does that add up? Go read the pleadings in our case go get a copy of the city's transportation plan- do your own legwork. And what will you say after you see whatever proof you're lacking? Will you change your tune or change the subject?
Rob rosenfeld

United States

#156 Apr 22, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
Rob,
Wrong. Everyone on here knows my profession and it isn't in the city government. You know what they say about assuming.
I'm just a citizen that is tired of all of you crying corruption and never supplying the proof. What really irks me is all of the out of town people trying to tell the citizens they are wrong. You don't live here so you can't say what is right or wrong. The citizens voted and made their choice. We have to live with it, you don't. We just want people like you to quit criticizing our votes and to leave us alone and butt out.
Fools Abound,
Then post the proof. None has been posted on here. Post it. Work with Rob and get it posted. I doubt you will though because you never post it and when you do post something it has nothing to do with Arnold. I'm really starting to believe their is no proof. Prove me wrong and post it.
According to you I don't live in Arnold so I can't say that perjury election rigging and fraud are wrong.

You are not very good at this.
Rob Rosenfeld Sr

Saint Louis, MO

#157 Apr 22, 2013
Son,
You were born with a silver spoon in your mouth, I shouldn't have spoiled you. You have screwed up the real estate you inherited from me. You bought a trailer park on your own and did even check the bridge that came with it. I sent you to law school and for what. You do a settlement and continue to fight. Don't embarrass me anymore. Leave the poor folks of Arnold alone.
Who cares

Everett, WA

#158 Apr 22, 2013
Rob Rosenfeld wrote:
I'm not going to jump through your hoops. The signatures of RUby Massey on the April and June 2004 NID petitions were different and the forgery was established during the litigation process. You can find the pleadings and those petitions are exhibits- if you really want to. If there is an investigation all will be shared althought the City already has everything on this issue.
At this point the most significant part of the forgery issue relates to the fact that Sweeney admitted in his deposition that he never investigated the forgery allegation nor did he inform anyone in the CIty council or government about this allegation after it was first made in 2008, although one would think the CIty council should have been informed while considering legislation to give me a 280,000 bill for the bridge based on the forged document, or whether to make a more reasonable settlement with me, continue litigation, etc. Sweeney was also the attorney for the WInklers, and the fact that he did not tell the City that the NID submitted by Mr. Winkler contained a forgery and perjury certainly ties into his conflict of interest.
At this point Rosenfeld, who the eff cares? I mean really. You got a deal because the city council got together and approved a deal where everyone wins and that includes you. You were excused from the big portion of the NID, the city has the bridge in place and paid in full. The city has some additional parkland for the future. You were going to pay more because you had more vehicles using the bridge than anyone else involved. You may think it was unfair because it was you. Doris supplied you with information from closed sessions and she was still patently unable to do anything for you except cash your campiagn contribution checks. Be happy that everyone involved won. Move on you childish, snobbish SOB.
Doris Borgelt

Arnold, MO

#159 Apr 23, 2013
It was unfair because it was unfair, not because of whom was involved. No closed session material was provided to Mr. Rosenfeld, just because it is normal in Arnold to lie, cheat and steal to win, doesn't mean everyone operates that way, just those in the "preferred" group. Laying the facts out for all to see always seems to elicit the loudest protest from that group.
The back room deals are just that and cannot withstand the scrutiny of sunshine. I would venture to say a large majority of the city's small business owners do not live within the city limits of Arnold. Then again, they aren't the ones receiving millions in TIF, TDD, Series 100 Bonds, 20 plus year tax abatements or lucrative land deals that involve federal funding. So you just keep complaining about Mr. Rosenfeld's small contributions to various campaigns and I will continue to point out the thousands that come in from out of state and large corporations that benefit from all the "perks" they buy!
Due to the recent election, there is plenty that will yet again be hidden from the general public, I will work even harder to make sure that everything is made public. When the first order of business of the new council is to banish the agenda for closed sessions, and the attempt to make it retroactive is made, the only intention is to hide things from the public. Now what are you hiding? Just remember, it can't stay hidden forever!
Letusnamenames

United States

#160 Apr 23, 2013
No proof posted. All allegations must then be false. Thank you.
Letusnamenames

United States

#161 Apr 23, 2013
And when have agendas for closed sessions been available to the public. I didn't think they ever were. That is why they are closed sessions.

Maybe it is because you are no longer on the council and privy to that information anymore. That's the negative aspect of not being elected.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Imperial Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
value village 5 hr Becky 8
Meth Lab Smell (Oct '11) Sun your Pappas 19
Know Missouri Law Regarding Cameras Before You ... (Sep '14) Apr 25 Light Bulb Drama 54
Rand Paul for US President Apr 24 StupidObamaZombies 6
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) Apr 24 Paul Bunyan 1,254
Who are the cute guys in crystal? (Oct '08) Apr 24 Schools 14
Petco Flawed Dogs on Saturdays (Mar '10) Apr 23 Shelti1007 37
More from around the web

Imperial People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]