Chelene Nightingale's Judgement Day
A recent article written by Jeff Schwilk in the Examiner.com about myself and Frank Jorge in regards to a loan that Chelene received from Frank several years ago is a disingenuous attempt at damage control to Chelene Nightingale's tarnishing reputation.
http://www.examiner.com/immigration-...te-nightingale
Chelene borrowed $6,000.00 from Frank after spinning a tale of desparation in regards to daily basic family needs. Frank, a sincere and sympathetic man, especially where a supposed comrade in the patriot community is involved, made her a personal loan in 2007, with a written document spelling out basic terms of repayment. After nearly two years of being back burnered, evaded, and ignored, Frank was nearing the statuatory limit for legal action, so he filed suit in Kern County court. After some normal delays in the case, the matter came before the court, and the Nightingales lost. Frank was awarded his judgement in the amount of 6200.00 plus fees.
At present, Jeff Schwilk is trying to salvage Chelene Nightingales name as a credible person by rewriting history. In his article, he makes claim that the loan was actually a gift:
"
Quote:
|
Jorge gave $6000 to Mike and Chelene Nightingale in 2008 when the couple was hurting financially due to some family emergencies. Jorge then suddenly demanded full repayment in the fall of 2009, but refused to accept any payments that the Nightingales tried to make. Jorge then maliciously filed a civil suit in small claims court claiming the Nightingales refused to repay a loan. Jorge obviously chose to take his hostile legal action right in the middle of Chelene’s gubernatorial campaign in an attempt to harm her politically."
|
First of all, you can download a copy of the audio file recorded on the day of the hearing. The judge asks Nightingale if she borrowed the money. She replies "
yes". Later, after the judgement was issued in the amount of $6200.00, Nightingale complained that she only
borrowed $6,000.00. Now aside from her two admissions in court, the document itself describes it as a loan. Jeff Schwilk, although a dedicated activist, is quite obviously a very poor journalist. Aside from his historical track record of losing defamation lawsuits to foreign invasion supporters, he is quite rapidly developing the same manner of wrecklessness where it concerns those within the patriot circles. Reading his San Diego Minutemen "Patriot Warnings" page would leave one wondering whether anyone but himself and Nightingale are the only one's worthy of anyone's full support within the movement.
But getting back to Nightingale's judgement day, Schwilk is claiming some political persecution was at play in the timing of Frank's lawsuit. As mentioned earlier, there were statuatory time bars approaching. If frank didn't file before them, he loses by default. Chelene had quite obviously abandoned the obligation to repay him by her word alone, because instead of going to work and paying him back after receiving the loan, she was busy making public face time in a bid to run for governor of California. Although that may have been financed to a degree by her adoring public through donations; her time was not being devoted in the least to the loan obligation. So political persecution was not the motive. It's just your basic "you cheated, you lied, you ran away". To compound her offense, she appealed the courts decision. Not an uncommon tactic, but then she condescendingly failed to show up in court for her own appeal, sending her husband alone as proxy. During the second trial, the judge ordered Chelene to appear by telephone and explain her absence. A second recording has been ordered from the court and will be posted soon.
While we're on the subject of proxy, the article by Schwilk is precisely the habit that Nightingale has exhibited in dealing with her detractors for years. Using a smitten admirer of hers as a weapon or a shield to ward off evil do'ers who threaten her empire. This way she has some plausible deniability where defamation lawsuits are concerned, or if the offending statements are proven false before her, she can shift the blame to an expendable pawn. Schwilk, by his own admission, is judgement proof, and by his historical record a proven propagandist. A more perfect relationship could not be found within her circle of influence.
But Nightingale's judgement day is coming again. It's been 4 years since she borrowed the money, and the governor's race is long over with, so there's no claiming political persecution now; no more appealing, and no more using proxies. She now faces an Order for Examination, where she must bring records of her finances and answer questions of the broadest scope that will help determine her ability to pay, and where her finances stand. Judgement day is here, and Schwilk, nor any of her supporters can do anything to stop it with the exception of lending her the money themselves. Funny how supportive people can be with their words, but then turn to mush where their wallets are concerned.