Nathan Thornberry: A question

You recently posted, via way of a letter crafted on your company letterhead, as penned by someone representing themhelves as an attorney… certain accusations, possible misinterpretations, and threats of legal action against members and/or anyone who posts derrogatory commentary regarding yourself or your companies. This extended to questions regarding barter income, which we maintain we have the absolute right to ask and research as individuals and as members of this association.

Do you give permission to bring those specific posts into the non-Members Only section of this message board. we think it is imperative for anyone who chooses to question your programs to be aware of the threats of legal action yoou have taken.

As the dicussion on barter income started in Misc, and YOU chose to return to the comfort of Members Only, dont you think its appropriate to bring the discussion and your attorney’s position into the blinding light of the public-at-large. As she is an Officer of the Court, I am unsure of threats of legal action on a privately owned message board are protected by law.

Where may we post this?

There is nothing in that letter which pertains to whether an inspector potentially carries any tax liability.

Do we agree that it should be posted here for the benefit of all?

After all, she clarifies the issue for all, doesnt she?

I would like to submit that I have no idea what this is about. If I need to know, can someone fill me in? Is this important to the community?


Throw the bum and his bit ch out of here.

Depends… Which side you’re on. :wink:

I’m with Jamin. Appearantly I missed a few posts somewhere! Oh… maybe it’s because I have been ignoring most of his posts in MO since Nathan has retreated to the Members only section. I can only surmise he can’t handle the heat of a public forum. One would think that for someone who can’t stop talking about himself, he would bask in the limelight! Go figure.

You should consult your attorney…LOL

Nathan, once again YOU and your attorney opened up this can of worms now it is time to pony up. Joe and now I am asking a simple question. Since you are tossing around Legal threats in private regarding questions asked in public, wouldn’t be the right thing to continue in public? or are you afraid?

Also I wasted 2 hours of my life reading this entire thread again, as well as the junk letter you posted in the private section and the absolutely false accusations you claimed. I was unable to fine even 1 instance of anyone you claimed said derogatory comments regarding this issue about your companies. I did however find numerous posts where direct questions were asked to you, and never answered, only danced around.

You keep mentioning to contact an attorney, well it doesn’t take a rocket scientist or an attorney to know that no one, not even you can simply make up a story and thin k you can get away with this slander and libelous junk.

Can we post that letter here ? Yes or NO


Don’t forget Jim… it’s not **what **you say… but **how **you say it!

It’s really awesome that Nathan Thornberry of Recallchek has that ability to distinguish the **true **meaning of the written words on a MB.

He’s in trouble and he knows it. This desperate attempt at intimidation and lying is probably his last gasp.

You can repeat your lies … pay recent law school graduates to repeat your lies (and add empty threats) … for as long as you wish, Pugsly. It doesn’t make them true.

Manny and Jim simply stated that they were advised by tax experts of their own potential for damage should they have aligned their businesses with yours. This does not say or insinuate that you are not compliant with your own tax obligations as you have insisted that it does.

You are appearing to be more desperate by the hour.

I have no “concerns”, Pugsly, that would involve anything to do with you.