AZ Ballot Challenge - ACT II (ALLEN)

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

drkate 'splain's the dismissal of Allen v Obama in Pima County AZ... or not.

Quote:

In Pima County, Arizona, plaintiff Ken Allen recently filed a ballot challenge pursuant to Arizona regulations. The Democrat party was served, along with county officials and a status conference held on February 23, 2011. The Judge in the case was ‘not certain’ he had jurisdictionbut when presented with evidence that he had, :^o

quickly granted leave to the plaintiff to file an amended complaint by March 1, 2012. The Democrat party, Pima County Attorney, Barack Hussein Obama, and others will be served and trial strategy is being planned. :roll:

Remember, Obama has already lied to Arizonans once before, and we know he will do it again if the Democrats are complicit in submitting fraudulent documentation to the Arizona Secretary of State.

Cuz this...

Quote:

The Court finds it unnecessary and improper to address the jurisdictional issues raised at the hearing without the input of the named defendants. The Court warned Plaintiff that it might be too late to cure any service defects and, upon review of the case law and rules, the Court concludes that the case must be dismissed,albeit without prejudice

Is being presented with evidence that he had jurisdiction.

:^o

gshevlin · **Joined:** Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:05 pm **Posts:** 106

Dr Kate's web site is a moonbat echo chamber. I am tempted to try and introduce a reality check over there, but I suspect that none of our comments would survive moderation, I can tell by the comments that conspiracy theorism rules the day over there.

Slartibartfast · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:02 pm

gshevlin wrote:

Dr Kate's web site is a moonbat echo chamber. I am tempted to try and introduce a reality check over there, but I suspect that none of our comments would survive moderation, I can tell by the comments that conspiracy theorism rules the day over there.

From experience, any obot-friendly comment at drk(H)ate's may show up for a while if she's not paying attention, but as soon as she notices or her hatriots get riled up the comment will disappear and you will be banned. I have a secret identity there ("Slartibartfast" is banned), but I don't use it much because it is too hard to blend in with the hatriots...

By the way, "moonbat" generally refers to a whackjob on the left while "wingnut" is the term for a right-wing loony (cf. urban dictionary).

BFB · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:03 pm

gshevlin wrote:

Dr Kate's web site is a moonbat echo chamber. I am tempted to try and introduce a reality check over there, but I suspect that none of our comments would survive moderation, I can tell by the comments that conspiracy theorism rules the day over there.

Kate moderates with an iron fist. And if your comment did somehow make it through, she would first ridicule you, then let her mouth breathers ridicule you, then remove your post but leave the ridicule.

That place is a free thought-free zone.

Edit: Tyop

Bob Weber · **Joined:** Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:26 pm **Posts:** 685

Freep is havin' a 300+ page nursery school play-lawyer discussion of AZ, all of it as relevant to the real world as the goings-on at the other end of the galaxy. 99-Cent Store Legal Expert "Diogenes Lamp" chimes in:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-new ... ge=158#158

Quote:

To: W. W. SMITH
I have debated Mr Rogers on the subject of natural born in the past and will not waste any more of my time debating it again.

Mr. Rogers is pretty much a waste of time. Occasionally he will concede a point just a little bit, but then he later goes on to just keep repeating the same nonsense.

If we found a document, signed by every member of the Constitutional Convention attesting that their intentions in using the term "natural born citizen" were to require American citizen Parents and birth on the soil, he would accuse them all of lying, or not knowing what they are talking about.

158 posted on Friday, February 24, 2012 10:40:54 AM by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)

Um.., DL, wouldn't it have been simpler to just write it into the Constitution itself? Y'know, save paper and ink and everthin'. Why leave it as a secret to be decoded somehow?

gshevlin · **Joined:** Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:05 pm **Posts:** 106

Slartibartfast wrote:

By the way, "moonbat" generally refers to a whackjob on the left while "wingnut" is the term for a right-wing loony (cf. urban dictionary).

So I just learned something new....that's why I visit the Fogbow...I shall re-title that site as "wingnut whackoland"...

Plutodog · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:38 pm

realist wrote:

Finally at Jack's...

Allen v Democratic Party, et al., - Complaint for Constitutional Violations

Well I thought the neighborhood look & the flag on the house and what I took to be a don't tread on me bumper sticker were interesting. And I thought the fact that the address is on his court document meant privacy wasn't an issue. But whatever. I deleted it.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

I see no reason or relevance to post a pic of anyone's residence. I'm going to delete it unless You can convince me otherwise, but it's going to have to be good.

borealis · **Posted:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:57 pm

Plutodog wrote:

realist wrote:

Finally at Jack's...

Allen v Democratic Party, et al., - Complaint for Constitutional Violations

"IF you fail to do so, judgment by default WILL be found against you?? "WTF? Not may but will?? Splain please.

SueDB · **Posted:** Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:13 am

realist wrote:

I see no reason or relevance to post a pic of anyone's residence. I'm going to delete it unless You can convince me otherwise, but it's going to have to be good.

Sorry doggie, but I gotta go with Realist on this one.

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

SueDB · **Posted:** Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:15 am

borealis wrote:

Plutodog wrote:

realist wrote:

Finally at Jack's...

Allen v Democratic Party, et al., - Complaint for Constitutional Violations

"IF you fail to do so, judgment by default WILL be found against you?? "WTF? Not may but will?? Splain please.

IANAL - This is a different state and county. We are talking state court. Pima Co. AZ...

Plutodog · **Posted:** Sun Feb 26, 2012 12:48 am

OK I deleted it...left my reasoning in its place and I don't see the damage but I'm fine with deleting it too.
8-)

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

Quote:

ME Status Conference STATUS CONFERENCE 2/27/2012 Available

Ruling In Chambers Re: IN CHAMBERS RULING 2/24/2012 Available at Courthouse

Motion Motion For Leave MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND BALLOT CHALLENGE & COMPLAINT
2/24/2012 Available at Courthouse

Misc Complaint/Brief 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT 2/24/2012 Available at Courthouse

Affidavit Affidavit Of Service PROOF OF SERVICE OF ORDER DATED 2/21/12 2/23/2012
Available at Courthouse

Misc Disclosure/Deposition/Interrogatories/Production/Discovery
INITIAL DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO RULE 26 2/23/2012 Available at Courthouse

Order In Chambers Re: IN CHAMBERS ORDER 2/21/2012 Available at Courthouse

Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #1668958 2/17/2012
Available at Courthouse

Open Petition & Complaint Petition & Complaint 2/17/2012 Available at Courthouse

Notice Notice NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COMPULSORY ARBITRATION 2/17/2012
Available at Courthouse

Allen v Obama - Hearing Minutes - 2012-02-23

gshevlin · **Joined:** Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:05 pm **Posts:** 106

I read the document over at Scribd...the further down I went, the more I was shaking my head. He submits that the United States is a corporation...WTF? And, utterly predictably, he relies totally on Minor v. Happersett, with no mention of the hugely inconvenient Wong Kim Ark...quel surpris.
The filing is riddled with grammatical errors and mis-spellings, perhaps not in Orly's league, but noticeable enough.
I note the final demand "including a jury trial"...under what law would that be a valid outcome? I'm not a a lawyer, so I have no way of knowing the reasoning, I note there is none set forth in the complaint, so my default assumption is that the complainant is blowing smoke. Any real lawyers care to comment?

esseff44 · **Posted:** Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:07 pm

That the USA is a corporation is a SovCit notion. They include it in all of their pleadings. It goes with the CAPITAL LETTERS have certain magic powers and fringe on flags means they are not legit.

justlw · **Joined:** Sun Feb 05, 2012 5:04 pm **Posts:** 18

esseff44 wrote:

... a SovCit notion.

Also, contracts signed in red crayon aren't binding.

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:54 pm

Ken Allen has refiled in Pima county AZ today.

http://www.agave.cosc.pima.gov/PublicDocs/

(Put in "obama" as last name and search on name)

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

Welsh Dragon wrote:

Ken Allen has refiled in Pima county AZ today.

http://www.agave.cosc.pima.gov/PublicDocs/

(Put in "obama" as last name and search on name)

''

This is on today's docket as well. Grabbed it earlier but hadn't posted it yet. Dunno what it is yet, but perhaps will soon.

Quote:

Document Type
Document SubType
Document Caption
File Date
Image

Order In Chambers Re: IN CHAMBERS 2/29/2012 Available at Courthouse

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

In Pima County - Allen

Don't know what the Order is... yet... but there is one issued today, same day as filing of new case or re-filing or whatever one wishes to call it.

Quote:

Order In Chambers Re: IN CHAMBERS 2/29/2012 Available at Courthouse :shock:

Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #CM1674005 2/29/2012 Available at Courthouse

Open Petition & Complaint Petition & Complaint 2/29/2012 Available at Courthouse

mimi · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:35 pm

What does that mean? Why 'available at courthouse'?

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23944

mimi wrote:

What does that mean? Why 'available at courthouse'?

Because they're not available any other way... no online, no scan and email, etc. You haz to go to the courthouse to retrieve them. Or find them on the net somewhere, if they're posted.

Tomtech · **Posted:** Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:21 am

realist wrote:

You haz to go to the courthouse to retrieve them.

Can we get our OCTPAW operative to get those before they head over to Sheriff Joe's "news conference*".

gshevlin · **Joined:** Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:05 pm **Posts:** 106

esseff44 wrote:

That the USA is a corporation is a SovCit notion. They include it in all of their pleadings. It goes with the CAPITAL LETTERS have certain magic powers and fringe on flags means they are not legit.

This is a very interesting observation, which helps to explain why so much of the filings of the birthers appear to be a triumph of crap over quality...since that is a deliberate part of the approach of the SovCit movement. See http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/i ... s-movement for a good explanation of how the SovCit approach is to "gum up" the legal system by overwhelming courts and other government bodies with dozens of voluminous filings and documents written in "word salad" pseudo-legalese. It helps to explain why attempting to analyze most of the documentation that these folks create is a waste of time - their aim is to bring the system to its knees, not to work within it.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Mar 01, 2012 1:40 am

gshevlin wrote:

the SovCit approach is to "gum up" the legal system by overwhelming courts and other government bodies with dozens of voluminous filings and documents written in "word salad" pseudo-legalese. It helps to explain why attempting to analyze most of the documentation that these folks create is a waste of time - their aim is to bring the system to its knees, not to work within it.

Are you talking about the SovCit movement or the Republican Party?

BillTheCat · **Joined:** Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:25 pm **Posts:** 1452

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

gshevlin wrote:

the SovCit approach is to "gum up" the legal system by overwhelming courts and other government bodies with dozens of voluminous filings and documents written in "word salad" pseudo-legalese. It helps to explain why attempting to analyze most of the documentation that these folks create is a waste of time - their aim is to bring the system to its knees, not to work within it.

Are you talking about the SovCit movement or the Republican Party?

Ohhhh SNAP :mrgreen:

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

AZ Ballot Challenge - ACT II (ALLEN)

Who is online