in Sexual harASSment. What a slime bag.

In a recent trial in San Diego, the Bank of America lost in its efforts to have a chalk-writing protestor convicted and incarcerated for up to 13 years for writing unkind statements on sidewalks in front of three of its branches.

13 years? For writing on the sidewalk with chalk?

In an unprecedented move in the trial involving only misdemeanors, the judge issued a gag order to the defendant and his attorney. The chalk-writing protestor and his attorney were barred from talking to the press or anyone else.

What's worse, the judge at the trial also issued an order preventing the defendant and his attorney from referring to the First Amendment and freedom of speech. The trial was about protesting in front of the B of A by writing on the sidewalks with washable chalk. Yet, in court before a jury, his attorney couldn't talk about the Constitution and the First Amendment. Amazing. They did their best, but the jury acquitted the defendant and the prosecutor, the judge, and the B of A lost anyway.

Mayor Filner took the side of the protestor. He criticized the prosecutor, the judge, and the Bank of America before the case went to the jury. Criticizing the B of A is a no-no. Apparently, he didn't the message from former Illinois Governor Blagojevich. Blagojevich, like many (or most if not all Illinois politicians) was a crook and had been on the take. This was well known. Find an honest politician in Chicago and he or she will likely be a tourist. Blagojevich had been the Illinois Governor for about six years. Six years without arrest and prosecution. That is until he criticized the Bank of America.

Now, there have been three women who have criticized Filner for unspeakable things. Drip, drip, drip. There will be more.

The first one apparently had the worst allegation, if true. See below.

The second one, a former deputy campaign manager, repeated a story in which a campaign supporter told Filner at a fund-raising event that Filner's deputy campaign manager "had been working her butt off for him." Filner reportedly, in 2005, asked his deputy campaign manager to turn around, patted her on her posterior, and said "No, it's still there."

The third one, who was neither an employee or campaign worker, described how he made a pass at her in 2009 which she rejected. Apparently the guy can take no for an answer and did not pursue her. Will she ever recover from the trauma? It was apparently a special, memorable event for her:



The first one has the worst and strangest allegation. She claims that he not only suggested that it would be great if she would work as his communications director without wearing panties, but made other sexually suggestive comments, and - strangest of all - repeatedly put her in headlocks. How odd.

At any rate, until the hanging, just expect more revelations -- everything from a one-time pat on the butt, to a one-time pass, to a claim that he used the word "panties" and used odd headlocks. The headlocks claim is a strange one. But if all that the B of A has for the rest that he patted someone on the butt one time and made a pass on another occasion, I don't think that they have much -- except commentators working for the MSM.

So they want to hang this guy? Or at least cripple him so that he is no longer in politics? They can do it without my support.

As described, he went for a kiss multiple times despite being rejected, and wouldn't move without getting a kiss. That's the exact opposite of taking no for an answer and seems like pretty clear sexual harassment to me.