There are Two Main Arguments Missing…
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
Something happened during the actual Preliminary Hearing August 12th, 2016 that made me step back and take a hard look at what was going on behind the scenes in the SB 277 litigation organizational team. I’ve been turning over rocks ever since looking for snakes – and I found some.
Since we lost the bid for the Preliminary Injunction I have been pushing even harder for an explanation of the loss – a real explanation of what REALLY happened. More, I want to know what is going to happen next.
As everyone knows I am not particularly nice (sometimes) – and I don’t let up, pointing out to those I am asking questions of how many readers, and who those readers are, that rely on me for information.
Yes, I’m a bully when it comes to demanding answers. Why? People depend on me for the truth.
I am getting answers from my inquiries – and you aren’t going to like what I am finding out. I, Tim Bolen, certainly didn’t like what I found.
In short – there are serious problems in the organizational teams. This case could be DOOMED unless we fix the problems immediately. I’ll be blunt – Going forward with an Appeal, at this point, is a BAD idea, and with the loss we could expect, would set up EVERY other State for mandatory vaccines.
There is a huge fight going on behind the scenes. The Canary Party is trying to take over control of the case using their usual “whisper campaign” to try to disparage Jim Turner and Bob Moxley and put their own bird-brained team in charge of the lawsuit. I suspect they are contacting the Plaintiffs directly, right now, trying to get them to sign up with them.
The Canaries want to take over the case immediately and file an Appeal on the arguments in the existing case. Turner and Moxley want to Amend the case back to its original much better Aaron Siri design (see below), and then refile a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction before anything else.
The whisper campaign claims that Turner and Moxley screwed up. They certainly DID NOT. The Canary Party (E4A) nitwits did.
I agree with Turner and Moxley. I’ll show you why just below.
Background…
This case was in the works for a LONG TIME. Attorneys came to meetings in California from all over the US to put together a plan. I kept waiting for something to happen – to develop and get it started.
After much deliberation the original lead attorney was supposed to be Aaron Siri from New York, with Bob Moxley from Wyoming backing him up. Three minor attorneys would assist with writing chores. You’ll see their information below.
Both Siri and Moxley (seasoned and successful litigators) were paid, ahead of time, to write up the case and case strategies to guide the lawsuit. They both did.
Siri, for instance, wrote one hundred sixty-six (166) pages – focusing on “the dangers of vaccines“ as the primary reason why mandates could not happen, with “the right of education as a secondary approach.” I have a copy of that.
Siri told the organizers how much money it would take to litigate and those organizers promised they would provide that amount.
A potential “funder‘ was flown to meet with Siri in New York, supposedly bringing a check . The “funder” showed up – but NO check. Siri basically said “no operating money no lead attorney.” Can’t say as I blame him.
So, with only about a month to go before the case HAD TO BE FILED, there was no lead attorney.
Finding a Lead Attorney…
The organizing committee had three members (minor attorneys) that eventually became what I call “the minor cooks in the kitchen.” So, you ask, “why didn’t one of them become lead attorney?” The answer to that is easy – none of them were, or are, qualified to be lead attorney and would certainly not inspire confidence in the Plaintiffs.
Who were they and why couldn’t they make the cut?
The first was Mary Holland from NYC law School. She, to me, had TWO major strikes against her (1) She has NEVER tried a case in any Court, she is, in actuality, a part time law instructor at a City (Community) college, and (2) she is totally connected, joined-at-the-hip as it were, with the Canary Party.
The second was Kim Mack Rosenberg from New York. She, also had two major strikes (1) I couldn’t find where she had ever been lead attorney in any case, anywhere. The New York law firm she had been with had let her go, and (2) she, also, is totally connected, joined-at-the-hip as it were, with the Canary Party. In fact her Linked-In account showed she was CURRENTLY EMPLOYED by the Canary Party.
The third was Janet Nalbandyan from California. This one had even MORE baggage. (1) Although she had changed jobs often in the last several years, she had no apparent experience in this kind of law. She now works for a Detroit based law firm, with an office in Los Angeles, that handles money-type legal affairs for auto manufacturers (2) Worse though, are those stories and videos tying Nalbandyan to the controversial organizing of final California Assembly SB 277 hearings.
Remember the scandal over the microphones being switched off and on for Allison Folmar? Remember that doll faced woman saying “we know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper) to the committee? Yeah, THAT Janet Nalbandyan.
In short, in California these days, everyone remembers how the Canary Party screwed up the campaigns. So, virtually NO ONE is going to follow, or contribute to, something run by the Canaries – a sentiment I share. No wonder these three were hiding in the background. For sure, they had to find somebody to front the organization.
Enter Jim Turner…
A few weeks before the filing absolutely had to be made, one way or another, the organizers contacted Jim Turner to come in as lead attorney.
Jim asked several people, including me, what we thought about him taking over. I told him that the idea of a real lawsuit using Siri and Moxley’s legal concepts was a good one – but that the Canary involvement was fraught with problems – that if Canary was involved at a high level expect to be on the losing side at some critical point – for they always seem to be able to “seize defeat from the jaws of victory…”
My advice – “make certain you, Jim Turner, have control of the case and dilute the Canary influence immediately.”
Jim took the case. To head off the Canaries he brought in three major non-profits with REAL memberships, as Plaintiffs.
The case writings were supposed to be complete, the organizers tell Jim, and all he has to do, at this point, is to get the case started. Who was writing the case words? The three women listed above, and they were SUPPOSED TO BE using Siri and Moxley’s script. .
Fly in the Ointment…
The case, Jim was told, is written around Siri’s and Moxley’s legal briefs. But, as it turns out – it hadn’t been – at least two VERY IMPORTANT (Primary) legal issues had been left out. The case had been adjusted to fit the opinions of the Canary Party.
Siri and Moxely’s original complaint was about “how dangerous vaccines actually were, and are,” – with startling detail. The basic premise was that “you cannot mandate something this dangerous.”
The Canary attorneys, before bringing in Turner, ten days before the deadline, removed ALL references to Moxley and Siri’s brilliant legal arguments and handed Turner a watered down argument based on the secondary argument that “children have right to an education…” ignoring the dangers of vaccines, entirely, as the primary argument.
Turner went forward because, as any attorney knows, you can always add an Amended Complaint, but the important thing was to get started.
The Judge was very explicit in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that he thought the Canary argument unpersuasive without the facts about vaccines, and denied the Preliminary Injunction.
So, What, and how, did this happen?
I’ll break the problem down into components:
(1) Too many cooks in the kitchen…
(2) Not enough time for the REAL ATTORNEYs to prepare. The case organizers waited too long to bring in Jim Turner.
(3) Not enough time for the REAL ATTORNEYS to take charge of the case and get it on the right track. Turner came in on June 20th, 2016 taking over for a case that had to be filed by July 1st 2016 – in ten days. Turner had to use an already prepared legal argument.
(4) Two MAJOR missing legal arguments.
(5) Constant interference from the minor cooks in the kitchen.
(6) The original case organizers ignored the advice of their primary consultants about the strategies in the case.
(7) People who have no business interfering are VERY MUCH interfering. There is bird shit all over the kitchen.
So, Where Are We?
Behind the scenes the excrement is hitting the fan. Why? Because the Canary Party connivers want to go forward with a useless Appeal of their half-baked “children have right to an education…” legal claim.
The competent and experienced Lead Attorneys are saying “NO – we first need to Amend the case to include the original material, and re-file AGAIN for a Preliminary Injunction.”
Going forward and doing something incredibly stupid without examining consequences is “THE HALLMARK” of the Canary Party. I think it is their Mission Statement (sarcasm intended).
But, I suspect, the Canaries are contacting all of the individual Plaintiffs trying to get them to come with them to Appeal.
Working together?…
I Knew the Canaries were there in the organizational mix before I recommended the case to my readers. Friends of mine said it was time to mend fences and build bridges, that they, the Canaries, should be given a chance…
OK, the Canaries were given a chance – and they reverted to form just like I thought they would, dropping bird shit, as it were, all over the organizational table.
My recommendations to the legal team?
(1) Drop Education 4 All (E4A) from the Plaintiff list completely. There are REAL Education groups in California, with thousands of REAL members, who, unlike the self-serving Canary Party, are REALLY interested in the issues. E4A has only two members we can see.
The Nevada E4A corporation documents show only two people – someone named Christopher J. Jones as President (I can’t find this person) and Rebecca Estepp as Secretary.
Estepp is the one who issues press Releases for E4A. You’ve seen them. She uses, it appears, the Canary Party distribution network for those releases. Notice that EVERY Press Release mentions ONLY Canary Party attorney Kim Mack Rosenberg in those releases – NEVER mentioning the lead attorneys Turner and Moxley.
These people are nothing but trouble.
(2) Amend the Complaint and start over – get the case back to where it was before the bird-brains crapped all over it.
What happened in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that changed my investigation focus?
After the hearing in San Diego I wrote an article called “SB 277 Lawsuit – We’re just Waiting…” In it I pointed out what looked to me like two incidents of SABOTAGE of the legal team’s efforts. Below, is an excerpt of what I found. After this I kept investigating and I found a snake pit. Let’s look at what I found…
Something strange was going on – in fact, TWO strange things.
Strange thing number one – Apparently there are some people interfering with our attorneys’ ability to manage the case – and it is severe. I received, I think, five separate reports of someone, an aggressive woman (NOT part of the legal team) at the Hearing, who was CONSTANTLY handing notes forward, obviously trying to distract our team’s efforts to answer the Judge’s questions. I HOPE, for our sakes, that that person didn’t upset the Judge against us.
Attorneys prepare days ahead of time for Judge’s questions, discussing answers, and points, with their colleagues, so as to make a smooth presentation. They DO NOT need distraction…
I have been investigating who that person was, and at this point I can say “She was not invited to participate….” I have questioned this person via email, about what she was up to, who she represented, and, so far, have not received an answer.
Don’t worry – I’ll find the answer one way or another.
Well, I DID find out who that person handing out notes was.
Normally, if there is a person in the courtroom interfering with the process, the Federal Police, after a subtle signal from the Judge, grab the offender by the hair and ankles, pound them a few times with a nightstick or truncheon, and drag their now-a-prisoner ass out into the hallway for transportation to the looney-bin office for further assignment.
That person turned out to be Janet Nalbandyan of SB277 legislation hearing fame (infamy?).
“What the hell was SHE doing there?” was my loud and persistent question, and the lead attorneys were reluctant to respond.
But I am persistent, and the largest, most favorable publication of the SB 277 lawsuit. Someone, not one of the attorneys, told me that “Janet thinks she is running the SB 277 case… and she wants to stay in the background…”
Oh, really?
There was an easy way to find out – I sent Janet an email with my concerns. Here it is…
Janet:
After you showed up in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing courtroom last Friday, and as my source tells me, began passing notes to Kim Mack Rosenberg, distracting the attorneys during their presentation to the Judge, you have my full attention. I hope you didn’t damage the case…
So, I’ll be blunt. Who is your client here? Where is all the money you are handing out coming from? What is your motivation?
Who, specifically, is E4A? Every name… Who is Christopher J. Jones? Where do I find him?
I have heard that you got your “seed money” from Mark Blaxill? Is this true?
Your days of hiding in the background, pulling strings, are over Janet. One way or another.
Tim Bolen
Narbandyan did not respond to me DIRECTLY – but, as you can imagine, I started to get calls from others – and my investigation went into high gear. You can see the results of my inquiries all throughout this article.
What happened right after the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that got my attention?
Just below, another excerpt from the “SB 277 Lawsuit – We’re just Waiting…” article is self-explanatory.
Strange thing number two – Several hours after the hearing three of the attorneys met with the Plaintiffs and other interested parties to talk about the Hearing events. A video was made, and it aired on Periscope, and invited “comments.” The readily visible “comments” took up most of the left side of the screen, and at 12:47 into the video one of the attorneys was offered a “blow job.” Just a little further the REALLY NASTY COMMENTS started.
So, how did those “comments” appear so fast. The “skeptics” had no notification of the video…
It took a while to get the video taken down.
Last (almost) but not least…
There was one more excerpt that is important:
Rife with rumors – I’ve been getting bits and pieces of a story telling me that there is a group, acting behind the scenes, to disrupt the case, and our attorney’s management of it. That wouldn’t surprise me a bit. If any of you have anything to contribute in that scene, please get a hold of me.
I do have, based on the information I am gathering, a working theorem of what’s happening, and I think, so do the attorneys.
i suspect that some strong language has been, and is being, used, this last week, in attorney communication networks.
We’ll see…
Yup, that was/is happening.
Stay tuned…
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
This is not what I wanted to hear. Ugh. Thanks for the update Tim. I appreciate your commitment and dedication to this case and the cause. Your information is vital to me in my mission to fight SB 277.
Wow. Interesting read. Sounds like California is not going to have to do anything to defeat these lead lawyers in this federal case because the plaintiffs are doing it for them.
Thank you for keeping us updated and please keep digging. Controlled opposition is insidious and must be stamped out aggressively.
And I wholeheartedly agree: the fake vaccine science must be attacked head on if this lawsuit is to be any sort of lasting victory. Rights are paramount, but so long as the nonsense “safe and effective” mantra is left unchallenged our rights will invariably be violated.
The stuff that Aaron Siri wrote was SO OMG GOOD that I insist he get back into the case with Jim and Bob. We’ll raise the GD money.
And I, Tim Bolen, am not easily impressed.
http://foxsanantonio.com/news/local/bexar-county-da-speaks-out-on-vaccines-and-autism#channel=f20fa523e2574e8&origin=http%3A%2F%2Ffoxsanantonio.com
Why don’t you talk to this attorney. Maybe there is someone with powerful honest proof to make the legal system sit up and take notice and allow I will repeat an honest without corruption legal proceeding to happen.
Thanks for the update. I fully agree; the trial must be on the dangers of vaccines. This is the most crucial battle we face as a state and as a nation. Can’t be put in the hands of amateurs.
I had high hopes, but knowing to what extent political and pharma pundits will go the squash any effort that may threaten their blood money profits, I am not surprised.
My taken on this:
The team, unless it has a WORKING PROJECT MANAGER , is doomed to another fiasco like this one.
This project manager will never lose sight of the goal: to accomplish the legal goal, and to that effect:
1. Oversee the team and making sure that only the right people are part of team – that no one from the big to the little Indians are more interested in advancing their political parties interests than the goal It totally dilutes the effort and is a formula for disaster. Going forward that must be the most critical requirement to be in the team.
For legal research
1. To establish a due date for each step of the research,
2. Assign the most qualified – after consulting and in
agreement with the lead attorneys.
3. Hold accountable assignees’ individual due date
For legal drafting:
1. Assign the legal writing of the appeal after consultation and
agreement with lead attorneys
2. Establish due dates for above
3. Hold accountable assignees’ individual due date
1st Draft Review
1. With lead Attorneys to make sure it does not represent
any “personal interest or view
2nd and final Draft Review
1. With lead Attorneys to make sure it does not represent
any “personal interest or view
External public communication.
1. Coordinate and Oversee who and where for maximum
favorable exposure
GET RID OF THE CURRENT CANARY PARTY TROLLS
IN ORDER FOR THE PROJECT MANAGER TO SUCCEED IT MUST GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO DO ALL THE ABOVE BY LEAD ATTORNEYS
Thank you for update! Yes, the mission of this law suit is vaccines of itself and only secondary education rights! Can we fire that stupid knuckle head Nalbandyan? I am sure there are plenty of second grade attorneys, who can do better job and not to be corrupt, as she is. Hate to say it, but most Armenians love money too much and will sway easy to where more money. They are also very manipulative and deceptive. It is better for the case to get reed of her! Didn’t mean to offend anybody, but I speak from my own experience. I live in a building surrounded by these people.
Seriously? Please keep telling the attorneys to STICK TO THEIR GUNS!
And I always heard Janet whats-her-name referred to as a hired lobbyist. She’s the kind of “leader” who would marshall a ticker tape parade into a cul-du-sac. She needs to GO.
Yeah,
1. start with proven harm, then
2. goto the need for exeptions, exemptions, and proveable state interest and strict scrutiny to assure minimum harm as per 1. above.
3. Then end up with constitutional rights to education blah blah.
The above approach makes the case harder to argue at the beginning, but easier to win at the end. What the canaries did, was make the case easier to argue at the beginning but harder to argue as the case goes on. Think of a train with lots of cars. I say move the locomotive part and make it the last car in the train.
Is there any way we can help to get rid of the yellow livered birdbrains? Can we file a lawsuit against them for interference?
Having worked with Jim Turner in the past, I am certain that he can successfully prosecute this case, if he is given a free hand without any political interference!
Several major areas in which SB277 fails constitutional scrutiny.
1. Vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” according to many courts and, in the “landmark” case of Jacobson vs Massachusetts, from early in the 20th Century when the dangers were less known, the Supreme Court said that the Federal Courts were not without jurisdiction to protect life and safety.
2. It is an “unconstitutional condition” to make families choose between their sincerely held conscientious objection to vaccination or their child’s state constitutional right to a (so called_ free public education.
3. It is a violation of the universal right to Informed Consent, a right over which the CA legislature has no authority. See my: http://drrimatruthreports.com/a-brief-for-informed-consent/
With all due respect, this lawsuit should be focused on the “unavoidably unsafe,” issue; vaccines have been proven to be unsafe and ineffective. The corruption within our medical institutions should be exposed for all its worth. Expose the corruption within these medical institutions and expose the fraudulent science that upholds the mantra “vaccines are safe and effective” for everybody, because it is a bold faced LIE.
Quit dancing around the issue(s) with the Constitution and the right to an education, etc. Vaccines are categorically unsafe; they’ve never been tested according to true scientific principles.
All the whining about an education – we’re speaking about Common Core. Anyone ever view any of Dr. Duke Pesta’s lectures re Common Core? If not, I suggest you do so. His lectures are fantastic, brutal and to the point.
This is a multi-faceted issue; there are so many layers we could discuss, but it seems to me that the core underbelly of this beast is, and forever will be until exposed, the rampant corruption within our medical institutions, most especially those surrounding the vaccine issue.
The core belief system of the vaccination program in the United States (and globally) is the false belief that vaccines have saved lives, that they are safe and effective for all. That’s pure and utter BS. EXPOSE IT. BE BRAVE, as Del says.
It disheartens me to read, Tim, of the shenanigans going on behind this lawsuit drama. I thought we had the Dream Team working for us.
IF it is true that the Canary Party is dead set against exposing the fraudulent science backing up today’s vaccine agenda, then they need to step aside. Tip toeing around this issue – today – can no longer be tolerated.
SPEAK THE TRUTH in this next lawsuit – the entire truth; do NOT go to appeal. Start over with. the. truth.
I’m so disheartened with this news, I can hardly speak.
I thought this movement was better than this.
…I realize my last comment somewhat contradicts a prior comment re this lawsuit. I am married to an attorney who has constantly reminded me of the ramifications re filing any type lawsuit re this issue.
I get it. I understand what Jaffe has to say about all of this…I get it.
My last comment is from my perspective; from my heart. SOMEONE in our legal field has to step up and do this – speak the truth and get this battle done.
Whether that guy (or gal) is Nico LaHood or someone else (Nico would be great)…I don’t know.
I understand those who continually speak about our Constitutional rights, etc. But seriously, our rights are hanging by a thread at the moment, if that.
If we all don’t come out NOW and start speaking plain unmitigated truth, it’s all over.
This fight is not about an education! We are literally losing our future(s) if we continue to allow this willful ignorance on the part of so many, to continue unabated.
My husband is not a litigator; I am not an attorney. Our vaccine injured son is now 23 years old. I have tried, repeatedly, to tell my story about our son to as many as I possibly could. For the most part (dating back as far as 1993), it all fell on deaf ears. I’ve lost friends (good friends I might add), including some of whom I have recently re-connected with, because of my anti-vaccine stance.
Lost a few close relationships with relatives, too. And you know, that’s fine. I can live with that. We managed to salvage our son’s future because we quit vaccinating him after six months of age. It was HARD swimming against the mainstream mantra at that time, but I knew in my heart that we were doing the right thing for our son.
If I were an attorney – a litigator – I’d be in that court room. NOTHING would keep me from litigating this issue.
I hope Nico is seriously contemplating taking this thing to a court room. Maybe it’ll take someone with his kind of passion to get this job done.
Where is the 166 page paper by Siri that you mentioned?
For starters, I am grateful for this case and what/who it stands for. However, I am perplexed by some of the options “apparently” available. The Court denied the injunction, but the case remains alive. What is the legal footing to actually appeal the denial of the injunction? The case is not over/lost (a denial of the injunction doesn’t cause the case to be dismissed). You either continue towards trial, or withdraw the complaint, amend the complaint, and refile. In my humble opinion appealing the denial of the injunction is not an actionable basis for appeal; litigation is on going regardless of the injunction ruling. I fail to see how anyone could appeal the injunction ruling while the case is active.
Thank you for the updates!
I fully agree that this case is NOT about education. It is about vaccines before “unavoidably unsafe” and government overreach. I really hope these attorneys can pull it off. Keep up the good work and keep the updates coming.
I get the Canary Party’s Facebook bulletins, so I copied out your last message about them and asked what they thought. This is their reply: ” Tim Bolen has a long history of attacking our work, and the Canary Party leadership personally. The accuracy of his writing ranges from not knowing what he is talking about, to making up things from thin air.
For example in this piece, he cannot even correctly identify the lawyers he claims to be investigating.
He describes Mary Holland as a part time law instructor at a community college (NYC). In fact she is the head of the NYU Law School Graduate Program, and a member of the Supreme Court Bar. http://its.law.nyu.edu/facultyprofiles/index.cfm… Further, Mary Holland is not a member of The Canary Party.
Other basic factual errors are that Kim Mack Rosenberg has never been employed by the Canary Party, and Janet Nalbandyan did not testify SB277 hearings.
The biggest factual error he makes is that, as The Canary Party is not a part of this suit, we have no idea what is going on with it, other than what the general public knows. There is no “whisper campaign” or attempted takeover. If the Canary Party wanted to bring a lawsuit in California, we would just bring a lawsuit in California. No “takeover” needed.
But we are a political organization, not a legal fim.
Most importantly, Bolen is not a party to the SB277 lawsuit either, so much of what he writes about, he should not even know, as it would be a violation of the confidentiality rights of the parents bringing the lawsuit. So unless someone is breaking the law, which is doubtful, we have to assume that he is just making things up.
A full rebuttal to the things he writes would consume all our time, so a few years back we stopped trying to address every one of his lies and distortions and just focused on the work. But this should be enough to demonstrated that he is not a trustworthy source of information.
As always, we strongly caution against taking Tim Bolen at his word.
Mary Holland – Overview | NYU School of Law
ITS.LAW.NYU.EDU”
…which sounds pretty convincing to me…
It seems to me, everything I have read from the hearing was as if the plaintiffs and the state were discussing two different subjects and cases. One side was arguing the unfairness of a law that is discriminating against a myriad of clients, one shows titers but denied school anyway, one has a child with an IEP who supposedly was supposed to be allowed in school without vaccines, and many others.
At the exact same time the state is parading out their own science and lies espousing the value and necessity of vaccines. These lies were never countered by the plaintiffs because that was not their argument and yet that IS the argument. Vaccines have to be on trial, the science has to be on trial and that is NOT happening.
I fear you are right, this case, as it is being presented now is simply going to set a more powerful precedent than a case from 1911 and doom the nation for decades to come.
If we don’t get this right we going to be looking at Zika frigging vaccine mandated at birth …every damn vaccine that pharma can think up is going to be mandated and we are and our kids are going to be the first line trial for these pharma whores..this calif is very important please get Sori and Turner to get this turned around..we will raise the money ..this was too important to have wasted a chance on ..come on calif we have to get this right….thank you Tim for your investigation I always wait anxiously to hear your insight.
It is to be expected that anti SB277 infighting will be encouraged by all the vested interests in this battle and I hope we don’t get tangled up in extra problems of our own making. I agree that the focus should be on unavoidable un-safeness emphasising that it is not a small risk for everyone but a high risk for a few. Since we can’t tell who those few are it is essential that the right to choose is preserved.
Thank you very much for the regular updates. How much money is required to get the original attorneys working on this case? Surely we could work on a crowd funding campaign? If ever there was a cause to fund, this is it.
Not convincing to me, though. Looks very much like Canary dissembling… Like E4A isn’t Canary? (insert laughter here..)
Natalie Mannering – I’m not involved in the autism community or had any knowledge about the Canary Party prior to SB277. But simple research shows that there is definitely ties between Canary Party and Health Choice. Mark Blaxill is behind both entities. Furthermore, Rebecca Estepp has ties with Canary Party, Health Choice, and E4All. Kim Mack Rosenberg might not have been technically employed by Canary Party, but she is indeed an Executive Leader for Health Choice.
I can’t speak to the behind the scenes drama going on between Tim Bolen and the Canary Party, but there is definitely a connection between the entities and individuals as he claims:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/04/introd.html
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/canary-party-sb277/
Thank you Accountable. That was certainly much more helpful than sarcasm from 2581623W. I am posting updates regarding this suit on an international forum, Project Avalon, so anything credible is much appreciated.