TISDALE v OBAMA (4th Cir.)

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:59 am

And once again Apuzzo fails to deal with the dissent of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in Wong. Which completely disagrees with his "interpretation."

Apuzzo remains an idiot. He's just decided to prove it more often.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23597

Reality Check wrote:

» Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:53 am
Apuzzo is actually arguing that Wong Kim Ark confirmed the definition of NBC from Minor.

I've heard several birther types make that ridiculous claim.

I love who these buffoons like The Putz and the Paraclete and the Pidge, et al. believer the courts are all stupid.

Of course, it's a win/win for birthers. If a court is stupid, great, and if they're not, they're just wrong and corrupt.

I've also already read where if the Selective Service responds to Joe (though what he really wants is for them not to respond and "prove" they have something to hide) that it means they've forged a new SS card. :lol:

PatGund · **Posted:** Thu Mar 22, 2012 1:17 pm

Reality Check wrote:

[The stupidity goes on for pages]

It's Mario Apuzzo. He would need pages and pages simply to state he's taking a dump.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23597

I'd bet this article is a doozie. :lol:

Exclusive: Atty. Mario Apuzzo Files Amicus Brief with Court of Appeals in Eligibility Case

Quote:

FEDERAL JUDGE RENDERED DECISION ON THE MERITS WITHOUT A HEARING by Sharon Rondeau (Apr. 2, 2012) — A civil rights lawsuit was filed on January 12, 2012 by Charles Tisdale pro se in the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia at Richmond naming Barack Hussein Obama; Neil H. MacBride, the U.S. Attorney [...]

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9411

realist wrote:

I'd bet this article is a doozie. :lol:

Quote:

Exclusive: Atty. Mario Apuzzo Files Amicus Brief with Court of Appeals in Eligibility Case

I'm just glad Rondooo is hiding beneath a slimy rock where nobody has to see this crap. If only all the birfers would do the same.

Epectitus · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:55 pm **Posts:** 2361

I kinda get a kick out of this particular tap-dance in a footnote on page 18 re: Vattel:

Quote:

The pre-1797 editions used the words “natives, or indigenes.” The 1797 edition replaced those words with “natives, or natural-born citizens,” as did all other subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions such as Dred Scott, 60U.S. at 476, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167 (1875), and U.S. v.Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 680 (1898). This is strong evidence that even after the Constitution was adopted in 1787 the definition of an Article II“natural born Citizen” was thought to come from Vattel

In particular, because IIRC the Venus case (one of Mario's favorites) does not use the anachronistic 1797 translation, and Minor never cites Vattel at all.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23597

Quote:

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 12-1124
Docketed: 01/30/2012
Nature of Suit: 2441 Civil Rights Voting

Charles Tisdale v. Barack Obama

04/02/2012 14 REPLY by Charles Tisdale to Response/Answer to motion for other relief [9]. [12-1124]--[Edited 04/02/2012 by CH] (CH)

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 9:30 am

Exclusive: Atty. Mario Apuzzo Files Amicus Brief with Court of Appeals in Eligibility Case

Quote:

FEDERAL JUDGE RENDERED DECISION ON THE MERITS WITHOUT A HEARING by Sharon Rondeau (Apr. 2, 2012) — A civil rights lawsuit was filed on January 12, 2012 by Charles Tisdale pro se in the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia at Richmond naming Barack Hussein Obama; Neil H. MacBride, the U.S. Attorney [...]

Rondeau is too dumb to know that the judge was required to do what he did without a hearing. Too bad she won't allow people to educate her

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in before you can view hidden messages

.
Still an ignorant, hateful, buffoon.

bob · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 10:44 am

Quote:

04/02/2012 14 REPLY by Charles Tisdale to Response/Answer to motion for other relief [9]. [12-1124]--[Edited 04/02/2012 by CH] (CH)

Tisdale argues (sans authority, natch) that the FEC lacks "standing" to file motions in the appellate court because it did not make an appearance in the district court.

:-bd

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23597

New (insane) Docket Entry...

Quote:

04/02/2012 13 MOTION by Appellant Charles Tisdale to disqualify/recuse judge Names of Judge(s) to be disqualified/recused: Judge Davis, Judge Keenan, Judge Wynn, Judge Diaz and Judge Floyd.. Date and method of service: 04/02/2012 US mail [998824063] [12-1124] (CH)

Whatever4 · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 2:32 pm

realist wrote:

New (insane) Docket Entry...

Quote:

04/02/2012 13 MOTION by Appellant Charles Tisdale to disqualify/recuse judge Names of Judge(s) to be disqualified/recused: Judge Davis, Judge Keenan, Judge Wynn, Judge Diaz and Judge Floyd.. Date and method of service: 04/02/2012 US mail [998824063] [12-1124] (CH)

Respectfully.

bob · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:45 pm

Quote:

04/02/2012 13 MOTION by Appellant Charles Tisdale to disqualify/recuse judge Names of Judge(s) to be disqualified/recused: Judge Davis, Judge Keenan, Judge Wynn, Judge Diaz and Judge Floyd.. Date and method of service: 04/02/2012 US mail [998824063] [12-1124] (CH)

"We the Purple" made the same argument in the 3d Third against Obama appointees. Which went sooo well.

Maru · **Posted:** Tue Apr 03, 2012 6:15 pm

bob wrote:

Apuzzo (aka amicus) wrote:

Amicus was advised that he would have to pass an examination on electronic case filing in the Fourth Circuit and then register for suchfiling. He was not informed that he had to be a member of the Fourth Circuit to beable to file electronically. On March 13, 2012, amicus took and passed the test. By email dated March 14, 2012, the Clerk’s Office advised amicus that he would also have to be a member of the Fourth Circuit Bar in order to be able to file the amicus brief. On March 14, 15, and 16, 2012, amicus attempted to find a Virginia attorney who would move his admission application. He was not successful. On Monday,March 19, 2012, he contacted various attorneys in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.[*] He then called Wayne Steedman in Maryland who agreed to sign his application. Upon receipt of the signed application by Mr. Steedman, amicus uploaded it to the Court’sweb site and paid his $196.00 fee on March 19, 2012.

* Don't tell Apuzzo, but:

Steedman's practice seems to be primarily dealing with the disabled. I bet the birthers fit right in... I consider birtherism an untreatable mental disability.

SueDB · **Posted:** Wed Apr 04, 2012 5:46 am

PatGund wrote:

Reality Check wrote:

[The stupidity goes on for pages]

It's Mario Apuzzo. He would need pages and pages simply to state he's taking a dump.

I wonder when he is going to wander over to http://CAAFlog.com again? He is about ready for another pummeling, again. They all had a wonderful time with him. <snicker>...

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23597

How to win friends and influence people by Charles Tisdale... :lol:

Quote:

04/23/2012 15 Letter to Honorable William B. Traxler, Jr. re: complaint concerning the process of this appeal by Appellant Charles Tisdale. [998837796] [12-1124]--[Edited 04/23/2012 by CH] (CH)

I want what I want and I WANT IT RIGHT NOW!!! ](*,)

This is not complicated. What's wrong with you people? =))

BillTheCat · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:25 pm **Posts:** 1430

realist wrote:

How to win friends and influence people by Charles Tisdale... :lol:

Quote:

04/23/2012 15 Letter to Honorable William B. Traxler, Jr. re: complaint concerning the process of this appeal by Appellant Charles Tisdale. [998837796] [12-1124]--[Edited 04/23/2012 by CH] (CH)

I want what I want and I WANT IT RIGHT NOW!!! ](*,)

This is not complicated. What's wrong with you people? =))

I notice recently that the birthers are starting to reach desperation levels with their "cases" sitting in the poo pile, sending letters like this to judges and such. :mrgreen:

BillTheCat · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:25 pm **Posts:** 1430

haha I love how he says that the case isn't about the whole birther thing, he isn't one of them, Obama was born here, it's ok, he believes that - He is NOT A BIRTHER!!

....followed by "He's not an NBC" :lol:

Hektor · **Posted:** Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:02 pm

A Legal Genius wrote:

"It is uncontested the President's father was not a citizen of the United States"

One of the things I love most about the birthers is their complete inability to see the obvious. According to the birther narrative, Obama is the prince of lies. Even accepting Tisdale's claims that he believes that Obama didn't forge his birth certificate and was born in Hawai'i, from his perspective for Obama (or any one else) to claim that the President is NBC is either lying or hopelessly ignorant. But since Obama taught constitutional law, it's a hard sell to believe he would be ignorant if the 2 citizen parent definition was the truth we all know. So the President is a liar, but a horribly bad one since rather than hide the fact that he had one foreign parent, he wrote a best selling book about it that helped to catapult him into the national spotlight. And everyone goes along with pretending the President is eligible when he won't even contest that he isn't.

Or, you know, he isn't contesting something because it isn't an issue at all.

Piffle · **Posted:** Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:49 pm

realist wrote:

I want what I want and I WANT IT RIGHT NOW!!! ](*,)

This is not complicated. What's wrong with you people? =))

Well, 'zactly. :lol:

And what's more, I WANT IT RIGHT NOW TOO!!! An on-point opinion by a Circuit Court of Appeals trashing the birfers' ridiculous interpretation of Minor would make my day. This guy's a trend-setter.

[BTW, I think he's got something there about the case not being complicated. Whenever a whacko demands the simultaneous disqualification of five circuit court judges, the case is not complicated. Trust me.]

raicha · **Posted:** Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:53 pm

Bless his heart. :-*

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed May 02, 2012 10:16 am

I just noticed Tisdale's name came up in the US v Bank v Rivernider case in Florida. Orly wrote a long letter to the court to trash CELII. Orly says Henry Tisdale is the one who tipped her off that Lincoln was submitting an affidavit with lots of juicy goodness on Orly.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/25567986/RIVE ... 42089-50-0

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Wed May 02, 2012 10:29 am

Different Tisdale -- Charles, not Henry.

everalm · **Posted:** Wed May 02, 2012 10:32 am

Jeez...another 54 pages of cack, the woman is a one person ecological holocaust on the amount of paper she consumes and craps on.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed May 02, 2012 10:48 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

Different Tisdale -- Charles, not Henry.

I thought we had made the connection but it appears not.

Tomtech · **Posted:** Wed May 02, 2012 3:08 pm

everalm wrote:

Jeez...another 54 pages of cack, the woman is a one person ecological holocaust on the amount of paper she consumes and craps on.

This is great crap. Orly is basing everything on her "evidence" that Lisa Ostella forged Orly's signature on multiple documents while Ostella worked for Orly.

The "forged signatures" appear on the set of subpoenas issued from Orly in Keyes vs. Bowen.

Orly defended those subpoenas and complained during the Keyes vs Bowen hearing that "I have already subpoenaed, and uh,(sic) those records".

In essence Orly is accusing Ostella of the forgery of here signature on documents which she defended the veracity of in court.

IIRC: Orly is also on record declaring the she has never authorized anyone to sign her name for her.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

TISDALE v OBAMA (4th Cir.)

Who is online