Florida Ballot Challenge

Bob Ross · **Posted:** Mon Jul 09, 2012 3:19 pm

BillTheCat wrote:

From Doc's:

Quote:

Dr. Conspiracy:
Mr. Colette and Mr. Klayman seem to be having a problem nailing down exactly where in the law that obligation appears. Do you know?

Quote:

Jerry Collette June 14, 2012 at 9:26 pm
Doc, you must have me confused with somebody else. I have never alleged that any SOS has such a duty, and have been encouraging birthers to ignore SOS’s and file directly in court against Obama and the Democrats, such as I have done.

As I told Jerry Collette on RC's radio show "No Jerry, I had you confused with a sane, rational, thinking human being"

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10651

neonzx wrote:

Piffle wrote:

=))

Larry is on a roll!

This was an ugly, totally frivolous publicity stunt and if anyone deserves anti-slapp sanctions, it's Larry and Bradlee.

I so hope Rachel does a victory lap on her show tonight. :lol:

I'm a bit confuzzled. The article linked says the case is still "ongoing".

Piffle · **Posted:** Mon Jul 09, 2012 4:00 pm

Yeah, it's confuzzling. Based on scant information on the InterTubes, it looks like this whammy was delivered on June 25th in the form of an Order Granting in Part Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Denying Plaintiffs' Combined Motions for Reconsideration and Sanctions. It'd seem logical that there was a prior order of dismissal (why else the motion to reconsider?) retaining jurisdiction to rule on fees and such.

If that's the situation, the case probably still shows up as "active" only because it is pending entry of a pro-forma final order and/or because the time window for filing a notice of appeal is still open.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Florida Ballot Challenge

Who is online