"He also cited a desire to travel to the United Kingdom for a project involving the U.S. Department of State."

This is possibly bullshit.

In July, we learned this from the Washington Post:

"His lawyer confirms to the Loop that Spanier is working on a part-time consulting basis for a “top-secret” agency on national security issues. But the gig is so hush-hush, he couldn’t even tell his attorneys the name of the agency."


*NOW* Spanier tells the court his work "involves" the State Department? Something here does not add up.

How hard would it be for Spanier to tell his attorney he works for State? Not hard at all. How likely is it that Spanier's requested trip abroad is for a government agency that is *not* the State Dept? Better than average.

Will the Court allow itself to be lied to?


Edited by cant_remember (12/04/12 10:26 PM)
Edit Reason: "involved"
I'll be just fine and dandy
Lord, it's like a hard candy Christmas
I'm barely getting through tomorrow
But I won't let sorrow get me way down.