Sometimes a question is asked or a point raised that becomes orphaned and yet has a way of pushing it’s way into a person’s thoughts and staying there. Kind of like one of those small splinters you can’t really see but feel.
That’s been the way of it for me related to the Dave Hill question asked of John Trimbach- a question raised more than once and yet remains swaddled and left unattended like a foundling abandoned on a doorstep.
A question asked in a variety of ways that segued into asking how a person could walk from the charges Hill did and could a similar example be provided?
Analogies were provided, and while an analogy isn’t necessarily a proof they do speak to what should be commonsense comparisons.
There are associated risks in admitting what is obvious related to Hill’s get out jail free pass-could open up a can of worms and fan the flames internet arsonists routinely set to obscure the truth-but I say once again that it is the truth and only the truth that has any value.
The truth belongs to everybody, it isn’t something to be sequestered, ignored, denied, glossed over, or revised….thinking it does is what has prolonged the events spoken of throughout this blog and become an unnecessary diversion and stumbling block.
So I’m asking two simple questions of John Trimbach and then moving on, others can work their side of the fence and I will mine-readers can evaluate what has transpired and arrive at their own conclusions:
(1) If Hill didn’t cut a deal how did he walk from state and federal charges?
(2) If he didn’t can a similar example be provided?
For those who may not be familiar with this discussion an explanation can be found in the blogs Not Trusted Anymore 1 thru 4.
Given the same scenario had it of involved Theda Nelson Clark or Frank Deluca/Blackhorse it would have been touted as an absolute, incontrovertible, and beyond question.
The obvious difference though is that Hill was Bank’s boy, personally recruited by him who along with Peltier served as “security” and went one better as resident bomb expert .
Doug Durham is routinely flogged as a mole-another in the Banks inner circle-and it is the associations of these two, Hill and Durham, that should lead people to consider in regard to Bank’s long standing immunity that Bank’s quite possibly enjoys the benefits of a sweetheart deal himself.
Who can say for a certainty other than those who have direct knowledge that the infamous informants A and B were not two men rather than the common assumption that it was a man and a woman? More so who can say for a certainty other than those who have direct knowledge that A and B were the only informants?
All that can be said is what we have been told-what we’ve been allowed to know, or found out on our own through other means.
Durham’s revelations if you’ve read them were enough on their own to have taken Bank’s down, add to that the testimony and statements of others and it becomes a no brainer.
Peltier had to go-there was no way around it, a fact he had to either accept or roll over himself.
No doubt promises were made to Peltier of undying support- perhaps threats as well related to the well being of various family members, or just an understanding to that effect Peltier had due to his role as an AIM/Banks thug.
The final chapters have yet to be written, and they may never be-reason enough though to continue asking questions and considering possibilities.
Especially when what is apparent is so glaring as to amount to a slap in the face when denied.
If any think this a non issue feel free to weigh in and say so.