Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 296 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next   
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:39 pm 
rajah wrote:
Reality Check wrote:
Is this the same case that is discussed in this thread? http://www.politijab.com/phpBB3/viewtop ... =25&t=2773

Thats is the one about Buess The one I was talking about is on http://www.riseupforamerica.com/rodclassvsjusticedept/update110509.html
so I guess there are two. Sorry if they have been mentioned before.
Regards ................Dick


This case is B DALE, RODNEY Vs. UNITED STATES, 2009 CA 005391, available @ https://www.dccourts.gov/pa/

RUFA is smoking something if they think that they won default -- given that the court issued an order DENYING default on the same day that it dismissed the case.

As for adding this to the Birther Scorecard, while it may have some of the same characters involved, I can't see that it's a case challenging Obama's or McCain's eligibility for the Presidency, so I don't think that it belongs on the BIRTHER scorecard. Maybe another scorecard of crazy cases filed by people-who-happen-to-be-birthers, but ... :lol:


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:09 pm
Posts: 7781
Location: USA
Occupation: Amateur radio host trying to figure out how to lower myself to shameless begging and stupid petition filing. It might be a good way to make a living. ;)
I see both cases at the link and that they were dismissed. Poor Judge Holeman got stuck with both of them. Why is Dale listed as "DALE; CLASS, RODNEY " in the Buess case?

_________________
The O-bot prayer:

Grant me the superior wit and biting sarcasm to mock the Birthers whose minds I cannot change
The superior facts, law, and reason to change the minds of the Birthers whom I can
And the wisdom to team up at Politijab The Fogbow with those who share my addiction and know the difference


- Allison 2/16/2009


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:46 am
Posts: 163
Reality Check wrote:
Why is Dale listed as "DALE; CLASS, RODNEY " in the Buess case?

He has literacy issues, here's how he headed his initial pleading in the other case -
Quote:
In the name of,
We the people of the united States of America
Naturalist Citizen of the united States of America
Petitioner; Rodney Dale; Class,

It went downhill rapidly from there, causing Judge Holeman to say in his dismissal -
Quote:
...It should be noted that Plaintiff's initial filing of July 29, 2009, consisting of 22 hand-numbered pages is, in substantial part, grammatically, logically and legally incomprehensible.

_________________
So sayeth the Rooster so say we all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 1:27 am
Posts: 1671
Location: Southern Gondwana
Tes
I thought that the cases might be marginal for your list but seeing as how that Sovereign Citizen, Jury Expert and Constitutional Scholar Carl Swenson was involved I thought I might give it a go. His main aim in life is to get rid of the usurper and as the court system is failing him I think he is heading towards the idea of another revolution.
Regards ..........Dick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:07 pm 
Scorecard has been updated:
1. Added American Grand Jury/NY – Rejected by Court. (Changes score to 0-57.)
2. Added footnote re: additional AGJ presentments:
Quote:
American Grand Jury has attempted to file multiple additional "presentments," in the following courts: Alabama Federal Court – Southern District; Connecticut Supreme Court; Florida Federal Court – Northern District; Kansas State Court (Wichita/18th Judicial District); New Hampshire State Court (Salem District); Texas Federal Court – Western District. To date, however, there is no indication that any of these courts have accepted the documents as filed and, therefore, they are not "pending" before those courts as of this date.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:27 am 
LeonardApple located another case filed in Alabama State Court (in December 2008; dismissed January 2009).

Chart has been updated to reflect Sorenson v. Riley, and to add one of Paul Mitchell's many filings (because 3rd Circuit issued ruling on it).


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:46 am
Posts: 163
The first thing that struck me when I read Harold Sorensen detail his lawsuit in the comments at Donofrio's NBC* site, was that it was the same complaint as the now infamous Ankeny v Daniels. Sorenson filed just 5 days before Ankeny, it looked a lot like there could be some connection between the cases.

A little bit of digging turned up a reference from Phil @RSoL -
Two Hoosiers File Suit; Talk of Other Suits Filed this Month
Quote:
Ankeny — who is not an attorney and describes himself as a legal researcher and “interested citizen” — said similar suits were filed this month in [highlight]Alabama[/highlight], Georgia, Illinois and Michigan.
I've highlighted Alabama because that seems to be a reference to Sorensen v Riley.

What this should mean is that somewhere out there are three cases not yet on the scorecard. If they follow the pattern of Ankeny and Sorensen they would have been filed in a state court against the state governor; in Georgia against Perdue, in Michigan against Granholm, and in Illinois against Blagojevich.

I've looked but failed so far, fair to say though I'm not the best searcher, it was actually Tes who turned up all the important details of Sorensen. Anyone fancy a birther suit hunt?

*penultimate comment on the page

_________________
So sayeth the Rooster so say we all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:39 am 
LeonardApple wrote:
...A little bit of digging turned up a reference from Phil @RSoL -
Two Hoosiers File Suit; Talk of Other Suits Filed this Month
Quote:
Ankeny — who is not an attorney and describes himself as a legal researcher and “interested citizen” — said similar suits were filed this month in [highlight]Alabama[/highlight], Georgia, Illinois and Michigan.
I've highlighted Alabama because that seems to be a reference to Sorensen v Riley.

What this should mean is that somewhere out there are three cases not yet on the scorecard. If they follow the pattern of Ankeny and Sorensen they would have been filed in a state court against the state governor; in Georgia against Perdue, in Michigan against Granholm, and in Illinois against Blagojevich.


We do have a Michigan case filed in December 2008 - but it was filed in federal court, and against Obama, not Granholm: Neely v. Obama, No. 2:08-cv-1523, slip copy (E.D. Mich. Feb. 4, 2009) (dismissing case challenging Obama's eligibility).


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:52 am
Posts: 62
LeonardApple wrote:
The first thing that struck me when I read Harold Sorensen detail his lawsuit in the comments at Donofrio's NBC* site, was that it was the same complaint as the now infamous Ankeny v Daniels. Sorenson filed just 5 days before Ankeny, it looked a lot like there could be some connection between the cases.

A little bit of digging turned up a reference from Phil @RSoL -
Two Hoosiers File Suit; Talk of Other Suits Filed this Month
Quote:
Ankeny — who is not an attorney and describes himself as a legal researcher and “interested citizen” — said similar suits were filed this month in [highlight]Alabama[/highlight], Georgia, Illinois and Michigan.
I've highlighted Alabama because that seems to be a reference to Sorensen v Riley.

What this should mean is that somewhere out there are three cases not yet on the scorecard. If they follow the pattern of Ankeny and Sorensen they would have been filed in a state court against the state governor; in Georgia against Perdue, in Michigan against Granholm, and in Illinois against Blagojevich.

I've looked but failed so far, fair to say though I'm not the best searcher, it was actually Tes who turned up all the important details of Sorensen. Anyone fancy a birther suit hunt?

*penultimate comment on the page


Here's one of the Michiganders boasting about their filling in Ingham County ...


http://www.cruzweb.net/2008/12/09/following-suit/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:46 am
Posts: 163
OReally Factor wrote:
LeonardApple wrote:
[highlight]...fair to say though I'm not the best searcher...[/highlight]

Here's one of the Michiganders boasting about their filling in Ingham County ...

http://www.cruzweb.net/2008/12/09/following-suit/

=)) See? That was no false modesty. Nice work. :-bd

_________________
So sayeth the Rooster so say we all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23583
Quote:
OReally Factor wrote:

LeonardApple wrote:...fair to say though I'm not the best searcher...


Here's one of the Michiganders boasting about their filling in Ingham County ...

http://www.cruzweb.net/2008/12/09/following-suit/


The case is Stumpo v The Governor of the State of Michigan, et al.

It went to appeal (have not checked the lower court decision yet), but here is a link to the appeals court decision of dismissal.

Edit: edited to fix link to appeal docket.
:oops:

I've not checked to see if this is on Tes' list and am not sure if it should be or not. :-k

Apparently this is not Stumpo's first visit to the courts...he doesn't like paying taxes nor the 16th Amendment. :D

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:52 am
Posts: 62
Reference to the Georgia case ... (and the immediate dismissal) ... and a :lol: :lol: to Erick Erickson

Bryan Terry, Sr. filed suit in Fulton County Superior Court, demanding Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel investigate claims that Sen. Barack Obama was neither born in the U.S., nor is he U.S. citizen, therefore he is constitutionally ineligible to serve as President.

“Failing to officially and publically [sic] vet the status of the citizenship claims of Mr. Obama will cast a pall of doubt on the election process and taint the election results themselves.”

-Atlanta resident Bryan T. Terry, Sr., in a memorandum to Fulton County Superior Court.

“. . . there is no basis for this court to issue an injunction or a mandamus or other relief against the Secretary of State. Plaintiffs’ claims are, there, HEREBY DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

-An October 24, 2008 order by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Jerry Baxter in response to Terry’s claim.

“Way to waste your freaking time and my email storage space.”

-Conservative Georgia blogger Erick Erickson, in an October 27 post on Peach Pundit mocking Terry and others who are trying to get him to publicly support their claims.


http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/freshl ... ack-obama/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:46 am
Posts: 163
OReally Factor wrote:
Reference to the Georgia case ... (and the immediate dismissal) ... and a :lol: :lol: to Erick Erickson

Bryan Terry, Sr. filed suit in Fulton County Superior Court...

Terry v Handel is already on the scorecard. I'm fairly sure it's not the Georgia case mentioned at RSoL.

_________________
So sayeth the Rooster so say we all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:08 pm 
OReally Factor wrote:
Here's one of the Michiganders boasting about their filling in Ingham County ...
http://www.cruzweb.net/2008/12/09/following-suit/

Awesome - thanx - am on it :).


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:52 am
Posts: 62
(Tes does have Terry - GA on her list) ...

I sat through Ankeny and remember him mentioning the IL name ... but drawing a blank at the moment.

Thanks for jogging my memory though


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:52 am
Posts: 62
LeonardApple wrote:
OReally Factor wrote:
Reference to the Georgia case ... (and the immediate dismissal) ... and a :lol: :lol: to Erick Erickson

Bryan Terry, Sr. filed suit in Fulton County Superior Court...

Terry v Handel is already on the scorecard. I'm fairly sure it's not the Georgia case mentioned at RSoL.


hmmm - after you mentioned this I was pretty sure that Terry was the name Ankeny mentioned ... but I may have just been remembering it from this thread. At least I remembered 1 of the 3 correctly (better than I usually do with names)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 12:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:46 am
Posts: 163
OReally Factor wrote:
hmmm - after you mentioned this I was pretty sure that Terry was the name Ankeny mentioned ... but I may have just been remembering it from this thread.

Terry might be the Georgia case, but I've got two reasons to be doubtful -

1. Ankeny, Sorensen and Stumpo all seem to be based on the same theory, that a US Senator can't appear on the ballot because that makes them Head Elector, and Senators can't be Electors. Terry is a more normal 'show us the birth certificate' kind of case.

2. Terry was filed quite some time before the other three cases, which were all filed within a few days of each other.

_________________
So sayeth the Rooster so say we all


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:41 pm 
Chart has been updated to add Stumpo v. Granholm, No. 08-140-MM (Mich. Dist. Ct. (30th) Mar. 31, 2009), appeal dismissed, No. 291681, slip copy (Mich. App. Ct. Jun. 3, 2009), recons. denied, slip copy (Oct. 1, 2009); (and to make a few other adjustments/additions/corrections).

Score is now 0-60 (counting cases - score much higher if count all rulings).

Additionally, have added - just bc I'm a geek - a "Birther Case String Cite" document (see sig). This is the type of thing that could go in a brief responding to a birther claim, to show the court just how many other courts have rejected birther suits. The parentheticals (short statements after each case citation) could be adjusted to address particular issues (e.g., to explain which cases were dismissed for standing, which cases were dismissed on the merits, etc.) And, I took a few liberties with the Blue Book (e.g., keeping slip copy even where case is now officially reported, to add links for folks w/o access to Westlaw/official reports, listing cases alphabetically by circuit/state rather than reverse chron, etc.). However, I just wanted to see what one would look like - so I did it. So, am sharing it :)


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Posts: 19999
Location: FEMA Camp 17 -- Malibu (Hey! You! Get off the lawn!)
Occupation: Schadenfreude artist.
Tes wrote:
Chart has been updated to add Stumpo v. Granholm, No. 08-140-MM (Mich. Dist. Ct. (30th) Mar. 31, 2009), appeal dismissed, No. 291681, slip copy (Mich. App. Ct. Jun. 3, 2009), recons. denied, slip copy (Oct. 1, 2009); (and to make a few other adjustments/additions/corrections).

Score is now 0-60 (counting cases - score much higher if count all rulings).

Additionally, have added - just bc I'm a geek - a "Birther Case String Cite" document (see sig). This is the type of thing that could go in a brief responding to a birther claim, to show the court just how many other courts have rejected birther suits. The parentheticals (short statements after each case citation) could be adjusted to address particular issues (e.g., to explain which cases were dismissed for standing, which cases were dismissed on the merits, etc.) And, I took a few liberties with the Blue Book (e.g., keeping slip copy even where case is now officially reported, to add links for folks w/o access to Westlaw/official reports, listing cases alphabetically by circuit/state rather than reverse chron, etc.). However, I just wanted to see what one would look like - so I did it. So, am sharing it :)

Thanks, Tes. Great work.

Looks like the honeymoon is over.

_________________
When there are a finite number of ways to screw something up, Orly Taitz will find an infinite number of ways to do so. (The Sternsig Rule.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:49 pm 
Awesome work, Tes. This would be a handy tool for any lawyer to use in a real case where he/she has to deal with the headache of a frivolous birther suit.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 1:56 pm 
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Looks like the honeymoon is over.

haha. No, he's just in Florida, and I don't ... sleep well when he's traveling, so had a couple late nights to work on it.

/threadjack


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23583
Tes, I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty of posting the string cite on Scribd as well.

Great work. :-bd

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:25 pm 
realist wrote:
Tes, I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty of posting the string cite on Scribd as well.

great - thanx!


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:43 pm 
Tes wrote:
Additionally, have added - just bc I'm a geek - a "Birther Case String Cite" document (see sig). This is the type of thing that could go in a brief responding to a birther claim, to show the court just how many other courts have rejected birther suits.


That is a thing of beauty.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:37 pm 
Scorecard has been updated to add explanations in the defense column to address continuing confusion regarding this issue. I added explanations in each cell about why Obama attorneys did not defend the case. E.g.,
-- Gov defended
-- Ct dismissed sua sponte
-- Obama not a defendant

So - out of 60 cases, Obama's attorneys defended 3 and the Gov defended 7.
In the rest of the cases, either Obama was not named as a defendant (e.g., state suits against SoS), or the Court dismissed the case sua sponte before any defendant made an appearance.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 296 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 12  Next   

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
View new posts | View active topics



Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group