BOMBSHELL: Liz Crokin | Fired from WND For Covering Seth Rich Murder!? Mainstream media is firing journalists for covering seth rich case, pedogate, and human trafficking. (pizzagate)

submitted ago by Th3L1b3rtyC0lumn1st

BOMBSHELL: Liz Crokin | Fired from WND For Covering Seth Rich Case!? After reporting for WND on the Seth Rich Murder Investigation, journalist Liz Crokin was censored and fired abruptly from her position.

Later in the day she was forcibly confronted outside the doorstep of her own home, by a woman carrying a badge and claiming to be a cop that was there to serve Liz her court papers. These papers were dated a full two weeks ago till this date, and represented the trial Liz already was notified of.

Liz asked the woman to leave the papers at the door and LEAVE.

The woman threatens Liz that she better open the door, and that it is the only 'LEGAL' way for her to deliver her papers to her.

Upon hearing this womans aggressive pitch, Liz calls her mother and tells her that the woman claimed to be a police officer. As soon as Liz mentions this to her mother, the woman verbally shouts I am not a police officer.

CONTRADICTIONS... Sounded like a luring tactic to me to get Liz outside her door for further questioning, interrogating, or threat or intimidation.

https://youtu.be/gsOXj5ROn0s

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

quantokitty ago

You don't have to open your door for anyone. No one has the authority to demand you open it ... not even a police officer UNLESS the police officer has a warrant. End of story.

Golddigger Liz, a Hollywood reporter covering celebrities, contracts genital and cerebral herpes from her multi-millionaire BF. After he dumps her, she sues him for millions of dollars. Then she writes a book about it to disparage him publicly and to portray herself as a "victim." Even though, according to her book, she was in a consensual relationship with him and he never sexually assaulted her, she becomes an "advocate for sexual abuse victims" (for some reason).

Not sure what you're not getting. If someone withholds medical conditions from a "consenting" sexual partner, they are guilty of a crime. Just because Liz Crokin agreed and was willing to have sex with said fat, old, dirty man, doesn't mean she consented to be infected with a disease. Come on now, you must know this. Why are you obscuring the case by saying the relationship was consensual? The case hinges on what Crokin consented to. If it was sex, they had sex so that's not the problem. But if this old fart was infected, knew he was infected, and, further, knew that the transmission of said disease could be spread through sexual contact and didn't tell her, he is guilty of a crime. Pay up, asshole.

Just as an aside, I love the way women still get the brunt of condemnation for relationships with the heathens in Pedowood. It's like the given in these situations is that everyone in Hollywood is a Babylonian, depraved freak out Satanist and that anyone having anything to do with this perverse crowd is obviously a fool slut and out of their minds. Then in the next breath, we have one of these Hollywood brethren standing up and spouting their beliefs on the current political landscape and we're supposed to believe them because they're saints and representing righteousness and all that is holy in the world.

Makes no sense.