I would never, ever, ever, presume to speak for Tes, but...with regard to the quo warranto it is MY (not speaking for Tes ) opinion that it is properly listed. It has been dismissed. There is nothing on the docket "re-opening" it, as it were.

If Judge Lamberth changes his mind and grants her a hearing (not likely, unless he wants to view Her Lunaticness and decide whether to sanction her based on that), then perhaps at that time it should be noted in the case log.

Just "MY" .02.

Scorecard has been updated with multiple changes (I got a bit behind...)

Latest Changes:

I don't think so. I've thought about whether to include his .. ? ... Article 138 info, given that he apparently did try to make some challenge within the DOD system. However, this scorecard is counting CASES filed in COURTS. With respect to the court martial, it is, of course, filed in a court. However, as much as Lakin wants to pretend otherwise, the allegations/charges have nothing to do with Obama's eligibility. It boils down to a publicity stunt run amok. (If he had been successful in his attempt to include related information in his defense, then I might feel otherwise, but - don't think so here.)


I agree with Realist. The case was dismissed and, as such, was no longer pending. IF the court had granted reconsideration, then it'd be pending again.


No. There is a bunch of birther-related information in the complaint -- and I started to add it. But .. when you read the information, it's just a bunch of blather and not part of any aspect of the allegations Barnett is making against Dunn.

(And, sorry for the late response -- just missed your comments/questions until I came in to update the list.)

Thanks, Tes.

I also took the liberty of updating it on Scribd.

Birther Case Standings: 0-68 As of July 1, 2010

This is all true. The charges, strictly speaking, have nothing to do with eligibility. But we all know Lakin's desired defense is all about eligibility. The IO's refusal to grant birther-related discovery is proof of that. We don't know yet what will happen at the court martial, but I think it is safe assume Lakin will again be denied. And then he will be eventually convicted. Assuming his birther bedfellows haven't deserted him by then, I expect his appellate counsel will raise the issue of being denied this defense.

An analogy: When tax protesters are convicted of failing to file a tax return (or filing a false return), the case is mostly about their actions, not their beliefs. But when they get to the appeal stage, the claim raised is the trial court's refusal to entertain their protester scheme.

Also: Birtherdom is watching Lakin's case, intensely; birthers think this is a birther case.

By the poorly-pleaded birfer complaint rule, though, the birfing must appear on the face of the complaint, and not in a defense. That there is a birfer defense is not sufficient to put it in Tes' jurisdiction.

Now, if Lakin files a habeas petition after exhausting his direct appeals, that would be a birfer case.

Kerchner v Obama hint, hint.

I do not have a strong opinion one way or the other on including the Lakin court martial on the scorecard. Birtherdom is certainly betting a lot on that one now and even more so as the civil cases get bounced. Lakin does not seem to have any other reason to have done this other than supporting the birther cause. We will certainly be following it regardless.

Updated per Kerchner ruling. Also added Lakin -- but as "resolved" based on my understanding (from the Court Martial website) that the "birther" aspect of the case is over. (I.e., since he waived the Article 32 hearing, per that website, he waived all challenges to the order denying him the oppty to present eligibility-related evidence.)

That changes score to 0-69 (counting cases only; not counting all appeals, etc.)

Chalice says she won.

Well, she's learned all about this legal stuff, y'know!

Yeah well.
Birthers thought they won when Lakin was court-martialed, b/c they could get discovery.
Not
Birthers thought they won when sanctions were imposed against Taitz, b/c they could get discovery.
Not
Birthers thought they won when Taitz and others misrepresented what Judge Carter said in the July 2009 hearing.
Not.
Birthers thought they won when the American Grand Jury Presentment was "accepted" by the DC Court.
Not.


Birthers think they win a lot of times.

Reality bites.

but...but...but each defeat is a victory, keeping the issue of the usurpin' mofo "out there" cuz, don't forget, they only need to win ONE.

Well, reality doesn't seem to happen in birfistan.



http://twitter.com/patriotsheart/status/18376931480

I'm not sure if that's the correct link. I think so. I can't see it since she blocked me months ago. No, being that she tweets at me, it makes no sense that she blocked me. I can see the timeline, but not individual tweets.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

#phnm #teaparty #eligibility #birthers #tcot #p2 -Baxter B. Swilley-Motion to Withdraw Scribd http://scr.bi/cOLOH8 -2nd Birth Certificate 36 minutes ago via TweetDeck

#phnm #teaparty #eligibility #birthers #tcot #p2 -Scott Lee Cohen-Motion to Withdraw-3rd Candidate Birth Certificate - http://scr.bi/9nN6rg 41 minutes ago via TweetDeck

Published Scott Lee Cohen - Motion to Withdraw on Scribd http://scr.bi/9nN6rg #readcast about 1 hour ago via Scribd

Published Baxter B. Swilley - Motion to Withdraw on Scribd http://scr.bi/cOLOH8 #readcast about 1 hour ago via Scribd

#phnm #tcot #birthers #eligibility #teaparty Here is another story- 1st Eligibility Victory- http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=393456 about 20 hours ago via TweetDeck

#phnm Our Victory -in the news! Sally Wiggins is a US Citizen! Proof is received! http://mchenrycountyblog.com/ #Birthers #eligibility @p2 about 20 hours ago via TweetDeck

#phnm #eligibility #birthers #Twisters #teaparty #tcot #gop #sgp 1st Victory - Eligibility case Meroni v 32 Candidates http://bit.ly/1st-Won about 20 hours ago via TweetDeck

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I might like to ask for DNA samples. Or for them to pee in a cup. Just cuz. Is there a rule about no felons eligible? How can I know that they aren't felons unless I can run DNA check? It's just logical.

How enormously flattering for Tes (and well deserved, to boot).

Get back to us when you win something against President Obama, Ms. Moron.

I love "bitchy Tes." She is SO hot!!!!

Me, too!

Another possible snarkalicious reply to Meroni: "Ohh, so sorry. The tally we're keeping at PJ is only for IMPORTANT cases testing REAL questions of law and electoral eligibility. You are probably looking for the tally being kept over at SomeoneHallucinatedALegalVictoryToday.com. With your latest announcement, *that* tally now stands at 1,328,899,654-to-0. Good job, and congratulations!"

My rather sedate response:

and



and

Update: Martin's latest case dismissed. Score now Birthers 0, Constitution 70

(Also added denial of Taitz's stay application)

Updated to reflect dismissal of Jones v. Obama.

No more pending cases. (Yes, there are a few pending appeals ... but all cases have been dismissed)

Thanks Tes for more great work.

Speaking about the appeals, I am anxiously awaiting the filing of Taitz's opening brief in Barnett. She's got a lot of contrary precedent to deal with just on standing alone. Will she cite any of it? Probably not. It's all "garbage" and this is, after all, a unique national emergency of epic proportions. Taitz doesn't have to cite cases. All she has to do is appeal to the judges' decency, since Obama is ruining the country. Practicing law for Taitz is really simple. I guess that's why she's never won a case. And never will.

Assuming Taitz gets to the merits -- and she will -- do you think she'll cite Ankeny? Naah. It's from the State of Bun Dogs, and it has absolutely nothing to do with Obama's eligibility or the natural born Citizen clauser as written by Emereich de Vattel. And, oh yeah, it's garbage, too. So there is no need to cite it. How about U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark? Naah. It's old and Wong wasn't running for President.

It's going to be born in Kenya, a Kenyan father and 39 social security numbers, inluding one from someone born in 1890 and living in Connecticut. Taitz may not be a good lawyer, but she's predictable.

That, and she'll threaten the court that it will be guilty of misprision of felonies and subject to prosecution when she gets around to putting all the evil Obot judges in jail.

Hmmmmm.

Arguably, we have a "live one" ...

Bowhall v. Obama et al (MAG+), Civil Case No. 2:10-cv-00609-WKW-TFM (M.D. Ala., filed July 14, 2010).

The complaint is wide-ranging ::::coughcough::::, but - as I read it - it includes, as one of many claims, the following (at page 7):

[center]* * *[/center]While unrelated to the birther claim, there's also this little gem at the end of the complaint (page 19):

So, in a nutshell, a hand-written complaint that no one from Presidents Jimmy Carter through Obama, or organizations from from NASA to Detroit, listened to or acted on his impassioned pleas to implement his ideas on all manner of subjects from the space shuttle to third party ballot qualification?

Waaah!
Arguably?

You can do that? I'm going to start introducing myself as a political refugee from PA. I bet people in MA will actually believe it.



They must be so proud...