PART TWO #4310
Moving on to the other document, what I found was a bit strange, but perhaps other anons and FReeQs can find significance in this:
On the top part of the Rice document, in the “To: CC; From” part, is a big censor mark. Just above that censor mark is another document under the Rice document. It also happens to be under the document which I’m speculating has to do with Boies.
On that document, it is possible to see an address:
“555 Eleventh St. NW, St….
Washington DC 20004 - 1304…
Tel: +1.202.637.2200 Fax…
www.lw.com
FIRM/AFFILIATION
Barcelona
Be…”
I pulled up my MAPS program and entered the above address. I was surprised to find that the little red map pin was centered on the Star Bucks.
Also in the vicinity, among others are the Peterson House, Qdoba Mexican Eats, T Mobile, Saks Fifth Ave, M&T Bank, Sephora, LA TIMES Washington Bureau, Ford’s Theater, National Gallery of Art, Federal Elections Commission, Potomac Electric Co, National Union Bldg, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, and Hotel Harrington.
I will not discuss all of these, but just a few:
Petersen House is where Lincoln was taken after he was shot at Ford’s Theater.
LA Times Washington Bureau proximity is interesting.
I grabbed the Qdoba because I like the Q in the name! :-D
Federal Elections Commission gave me pause, as did the proximity of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
Now, the question is, why would Q be showing us a document which would be of Q interest from a STARBUCK’S???
I am too chicken to call that phone number. I have no idea what it might reach.
However, the web link, www.lw.com leads to Latham and Watkins LLC. It is a law office.
Here is from the “About” page:
Latham is dedicated to working with clients to help them achieve their business goals and overcome legal challenges anywhere in the world. From a global platform spanning 14 countries, Latham lawyers help clients succeed.
Devoted to Client Service
Latham is committed to helping clients achieve their business strategies and providing outstanding legal services around the world. Clients depend on the firm to find innovative solutions to complex business issues, and Latham lawyers leverage the firm’s global platform to help clients handle these challenges.
Latham is a single, integrated partnership focused on providing the most collaborative approach to client service. The firm offers:
Deep experience in successful enterprise-transforming transactions and in defending bet-the-company controversies
A solutions-based approach, providing innovative and sound commercial advice
Optimally sized teams that provide cost-effective and high-quality services
A culture geared toward establishing and nurturing long-term client relationships
Just the Facts
The People
More than 2,700 lawyers across a global platform spanning 14 countries; Latham lawyers speak more than 60 languages
The Practice
TRULY A “ONE-FIRM” FIRM – LATHAM HAS NO HEADQUARTERS, AND FIRM MANAGEMENT IS SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, ALLOWING LATHAM TO SERVICE CLIENTS WITH THE BEST-SUITED TEAMS REGARDLESS OF LOCATION
More than 60 international practice groups and industry teams
Commitment to Pro Bono and Community Service
Latham lawyers and professional staff performed approximately 225,000 hours of pro bono work in 2019 and approximately 3.7 million hours between 2000-2019, valued at more than US$1.8 billion
Signatory to Pro Bono Institute’s global Law Firm Pro Bono Challenge
Learn more by reading our 2019 Pro Bono Annual Review.
Women Enriching Business (WEB)
The Women Enriching Business (WEB) Committee promotes the long-term success of women lawyers and executives around the globe, and empowers them to become industry leaders
Since its founding more than a decade ago, WEB has held more than 700 successful events throughout the United States, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia
Latham Sustainability
Latham’s global program seeks to reduce its environmental…
I am not certain what significance there might be about “Barcelona,” which we see on the document. However, the home page of this web site shows “COVID-19 RESOURCES.” Spain has been hit hard. Are they soliciting help from Latham and Watkins about the Covid disaster?
Why would this organization be operating out of a STARBUCK’S for crying out loud????
I was not able too find a CONTACT US or to verify their Washington address on their website, indeed they claim not to have a corporate HQ, which is weird in itself - but I thought FReeQs and anons might be interested in this following page from their web site:
https://www.lw.com/practices/wevegotwashingtoncovered
Is there a secret area in the Starbuck’s for such high powered operations to be based? Or am I as nutz as I think I sound??? Would the Washington DC location for this international team really be in a Starbuck’s? Why would they receive mail there, as apparently they do, if we believe the document Q shows us is real?
And just one final idle question, which I have no way of resolving. Just wondering if the Watkins in Latham and Watkins has any kinship or connection to ECW? Probably not, since he is not described to be a lawyer, and most compellingly, the firm sounds as though it may possibly be a derp firm….but worth asking anyway, IMHO. Maybe ECW has
a 3rd cousin twice removed or something there. Or, most likely, no connection at all.
END PART TWO OF TWO about #4310
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
I called it. A guy answered and said 'Latham and Watkins'. I said who is this? He said, 'You've reached the law offices of Latham and Watkins'.
I said, 'Sorry, wrong number'. He seemed a pleasant chap. Sounded a bit derpy, though. Now I have to wash my ear out.
ICYMI
EXCLUSIVE: Mueller Crook Andrew Weissmann Was Behind Documents Illegally Released to the Press Before Roger Stone Was Even Indicted
Weismann’s crime carries a longer sentence than Stone’s.
You amaze me TEXOKIE. Great diggin’
Since I mostly lurk, I don’t always mention, but damn, you’re good.
Not sure if this is going help or hinder your why Starbucks, but........
The first Starbucks opened in Seattle, Washington, in 1971. It was the brainchild of college friends and future business partners, Jerry Baldwin, Zev Siegl, and Gordon Bowker. They were an English teacher, a history teacher, and a writer, respectively.
by 1987, the three original owners had done what they set out to do. So they sold the entire chain of stores to former manager, Howard Schultz. He quoted a number, $3.8 million, a song, in retrospect. Baldwin offered Schultz 90 days to raise the money. Schultz, who was in his early 30’s and owned his own coffee business, was ecstatic.
Schultz was thrilled of course, but had his own problems, too.
Baldwin called Schultz to come in for a meeting, he had some disappointing news. He informed him that they had a competitive buyer.
Greenberg told Schultz to stop by his office the next day to meet his firm’s senior partner, whom he said might have some interest in the budding coffee business as well. He didn’t know who this fellow was, but if he had the means to bid on Starbucks, he was surely a man worthy of hearing out.
The senior partner turned out to be none other than Bill Gates Senior, father of Microsoft founder Bill Gates. Gates Sr.
Schultz was still about a couple million short of what the founders were looking for.
We’re going to find the money and my son, and I are going to invest.” (Gates)
https://www.bain.com/insights/the-starbucks-effect/
https://www.motherjones.com/food/2012/09/romney-monsanto-bain/
Gates SR apparently head of PP before Roe V. Wade. So Gates and Romney might be poisoning coffee? The millennials love Starbucks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX9O3Yi-Nn0
More links on her page.
Was Starbucks located at that address on 5 January? That was so fishy, wasn’t it?
Q #4310 is a tutorial about both sides of the chess board recognizing the plays. Both sides of the board recognize when and how to execute a play.
Specifically, was seeing Obama pose directives/(clues) in the form of questions. Where have we seen that before? :D
Also, Q makes mention of the January 5 crew would have interest in extracting HRC’s fat from the fire of the Russian hoax.. Made me think about “David” Kendall, when you mentioned, “counsel: David... “.