Lamb v. Obama [and Romney] (Alaska Super. Ct.)

bob · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:20 am

Restoring Liberty (Joe Miller's blog): Alaskan Files Suit Against Presidential Candidates, Cites Miller & Obama Senate Cases

Quote:

Citing case law in both California and Alaska, Anchorage Resident Thomas A. Lamb has filed suit in the Superior Court of Alaska for access to private records for both President Barack Obama and Republican Nominee Willard “Mitt” Romney.

Lamb believes that precedent created by a 2004 California case instigated by Obama insiders requiring Illinois US Senate candidate Jack Ryan’s divorce records to be made public, and a 2010 Alaska case requiring personnel files for Alaska US Senate Candidate Joe Miller to be released, constitute grounds for further public disclosure of private documents for both major party’s presidential candidates.

[...]

The impetus behind the inquiry? Among other things, Lamb cites suggestions from Democrat US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that Romney “manipulated” his tax returns, and the allegation that Barack Obama may have committed fraud by accessing financial assistance, purportedly as a foreign student. Sources for the claim against Obama include US and Indonesian law, the president’s own writings, and sworn affidavits.

If Lamb’s material claims are substantiated, it appears the president may have fraudulently received student aid from the federal government by making false claims about his legal status.

No. 3AN-12-09961CI in the Alaska Superior Court.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:23 am

I for one would accept the quid pro quo: President Obama to release his Oxy records in exchange for Romney releasing his tax records since 2001.

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10775

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

bob · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:55 am

For the record, Lamb is suing (pro se) Obama and Romney directly. In contrast, news organizations filed suit to unseal the court record of Ryan's divorce records, which normally would be public. Similarly, news organizations filed suit for access to Miller's personnel file at a government job.

The court will have little problem telling Lamb that it can't order the parties to release whatever Lamb wants.

kate520 · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 12:08 pm

Someone is gonna say it, might as well be me.

Lamb is full of sheep.

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:28 pm

Ok, I'll go downtown and get it (for completeness), but why does Alaska always get the really crappy birther cases?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:34 pm

GreatGrey wrote:

Ok, I'll go downtown and get it (for completeness), but why does Alaska always get the really crappy birther cases?

TFC

(The first word is "too" and the last word is "cold.")

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4221

GreatGrey wrote:

Ok, I'll go downtown and get it (for completeness), but why does Alaska always get the really crappy birther cases?

Probably because all the smart people stay huddled in their homes trying to keep warm?

Anyway, thanks for the SNOW BOOTS on the ground. ;;)

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:14 pm

Lamb v Obama/Romney 3AN-12-09961CI

Includes summonses to Obama & Romney

Edit: The boss should just ignore this one and let Team Romney bear the costs of getting it dismissed.

Edit: Adjusted link to the file on 10/28/12, Tom was hotlinking

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Fri Oct 12, 2012 10:53 pm

↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
Ahem, I braved a blizzard for this, in a convertible.

kimba · **Joined:** Tue Sep 08, 2009 3:24 pm **Posts:** 6736

Good Get, GG! The visual on the convertible in a blizzard is not pretty. My favorite line:

Quote:

In 1971, Barack Obama attended Occidental college; was known as Barry and was involved in the party scene.

Edit: Obama 1971

nbc · **Joined:** Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am **Posts:** 2619

I did not see any citation of the Miller of Ryan cases...

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:00 am

nbc wrote:

I did not see any citation of the Miller of Ryan cases...

He cites Miller in his demand letter which he has posted on his blawg: http://thomasalamb.blogspot.com/2012/09 ... arack.html

Miller http://matchbin-assets.s3.amazonaws.com ... ED_EXT.pdf

.

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:26 am

And he filed more 'stuff' today.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109803555/Mem ... -PDFMotion

.

Plutodog · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:28 am

GreatGrey wrote:

↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
Ahem, I braved a blizzard for this, in a convertible.

You gotz a convertible? What kind? ;;)

SueDB · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 1:27 am

kimba wrote:

Good Get, GG! The visual on the convertible in a blizzard is not pretty. My favorite line:

Quote:

In 1971, Barack Obama attended Occidental college; was known as Barry and was involved in the party scene.

Edit: Obama 1971

Yeah, the birthday and roller skate party scene for the other kids on the block...or since I am in this forum, the Birfday and roller skate party scene. :lol:

bob · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 3:21 am

Quote:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109803555/Memorandum-PDFMotion

...a student of the Taitz School of Demands and Foot Stomping. Only briefer and with fewer commas.

PatGund · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 3:22 am

GreatGrey wrote:

Lamb v Obama/Romney 3AN-12-09961CI

Includes summonses to Obama & Romney

Edit: The boss should just ignore this one and let Team Romney bear the costs of getting it dismissed.

Most of the Obama part is recycled Berg droppings. *rolls eyes*

SueDB · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 3:23 am

PatGund wrote:

GreatGrey wrote:

Lamb v Obama/Romney 3AN-12-09961CI

Includes summonses to Obama & Romney

Edit: The boss should just ignore this one and let Team Romney bear the costs of getting it dismissed.

Most of the Obama part is recycled Berg droppings. *rolls eyes*

Now days, the defense can occupy their time with some cutting and pasting of their own. Lots of proven winners in our bulging examples file. :lol:

esseff44 · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:21 pm

So, Full Faith and Credit Clause means anyone can sue anyone else to produce their private records and the court can ban anyone from helping them refuse or deny. Even O'rly Law doesn't go that far. This is an entirely novel interpretation. Are some lawsuits just so far out there that the judge can just say so and not put the defendants to a lot of inconvenience and expense of responding?

Tarrant · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:05 pm **Posts:** 795

esseff44 wrote:

So, Full Faith and Credit Clause means anyone can sue anyone else to produce their private records and the court can ban anyone from helping them refuse or deny. Even O'rly Law doesn't go that far. This is an entirely novel interpretation. Are some lawsuits just so far out there that the judge can just say so and not put the defendants to a lot of inconvenience and expense of responding?

If you read Freep this is a common and completely out of left field interpretation they use. They commonly say things like "Hawaii has no Constitutional way to refuse another state's Full Faith and Credit demands for access to their original records". Then they add to the ever-growing conspiracy by opining that the only reason they don't make an "official" Full Faith and Credit "demand" for original records is that they don't want to provoke the Constitutional crisis that would entail when it's shown there aren't any.

This completely backwards interpretation only comes when you're desperate for the words to mean it. Any common-sense reading of the phrase clearly means the point is that states are essentially required to trust the certified records from other states, assuming they are done in a manner Congress directs, not that it gives a state the right to demand any other state prove something on demand - that's backwards...but that's birthers.

Dallasite · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm

Couldn't Obama and Romney say "sorry, I'm not in possession of" most of the records this moron is demanding? Since Romney doesn't have Bain's personnel records, Obama doesn't have ACORN's personnel records, neither have their school records, etc, etc, etc? Lamb thinks he's pretty clever but wouldn't he have to sue each entity, not these candidates, to force them to release records regarding Obama and Romney?

esseff44 · **Posted:** Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:49 pm

My question is why should anyone have to respond at all to such a complaint? It should be rejected a frivolous on its face.

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:21 am

Tom Lamb says on the twitter machine:

Quote:

@D_R_Bastiches I have the Obama's certified receipt of summons and complaint -> oct 4th. Exhibit A It gets filed today. #tcot

https://twitter.com/tlamb775/statuses/2 ... 6677524480

.

GreatGrey · **Posted:** Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:55 am

Docket updates.

Quote:

10/12/2012 Motion for Expedited Consideration of: Plaintiff's Motion for Immediate Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney Attorney: Pro per (0100001) Thomas A Lamb (Plaintiff); Filing Party: Lamb, Thomas A Case Motion #1

10/12/2012 Plaintiff's Motion for Immediate Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney Attorney: Pro per (0100001) Thomas A Lamb (Plaintiff); Filing Party: Lamb, Thomas A Case Motion #2

10/15/2012 Notice of Deficient Filing(s) mailed re: expedited and underlying lack date of service, no signature on service, incorrect case number Notice of Deficient Filing(s) (Anchorage) Sent on: 10/15/2012 08:55:26.52

10/15/2012 Order Denying Motion for Expedited Consideration of: Plaintiff's Motion for Immediate Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney ~ On October 11, 2012, Mr. Thomas Lamb filed a motion for expedited consideration of his motion for immediate disclosure of records. At a minimum, the motion is premature. Before the plaintiff’s motion could be considered, plaintiff must provide the court with legitimate Civil Rule 5 proof of service of the summons and complaint and the pending motions and supporting documents on defendants. Thus, the motion for expedited consideration is denied at this time. Lamb, Thomas A Case Motion #1 Motion for Expedited Consideration of: Plaintiff's Motion for Immediate Disclosure of Records Pertaining to Presidential Candidates Barack Obama and Mitt Romney

Dang, where have we seen docket entries like that before?

Edit: Linky for Rikker: http://www.courtrecords.alaska.gov/eser ... *vO546SQfk

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Lamb v. Obama [and Romney] (Alaska Super. Ct.)

Who is online