Taitz v. Colvin (Formerly Astrue) - FOIA action

Post by **Sterngard Friegen** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:52 pm

Ummm.. here is a very simple (and probably insanely stupid) IANAL question... Does one have to file a response to everything that the opposition files?

Orly Taitz does.I will not comment substantively until we have confirmation this has been filed. I would urge others here to do the same.

Post by **realist** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:56 pm

...maybe someone can Scrib'd this.
[/break1]scribd.com/doc/66694148]http://www.scribd.com/doc/66694148

Until Jack Ryan surfaces ...

TAITZ v ASTRUE (USDC D.C.)

The [link]DRAFT RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION,http://www.scribd.com/doc/66702087/TAITZ-v-ASTRUE-USDC-D-C-DRAFT-Response-to-Opposition-to-Motion-to-Reconside-From-Taitz-Posting-66694148-Orly-replytooppositionre[/link] is also up at Jack's.

YouTube · Post by **Kriselda Gray** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 1:58 pm

Deleted as to avoid being helpful & hoping it's not too late

Post by **realist** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:00 pm

Here's an idea... why don't we all just jump up and one by one point out all of Orly's errors prior to knowing this is filed (it is not on PACER to my knowledge). ](*,)

AnitaMaria · Post by **AnitaMaria** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:03 pm

I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Ecuador many years ago. As anyone who is familiar with life in developing countries will confirm, intestinal diseases and lack of water are two mainstays of life in many countries. One day, I was in the Peace Corps office in Quito when, for whatever reason (who knows why--I had stopped questioning it by that point) the water pressure was very low and the toilets were not flushing completely. My friend Steve--a fellow Peace Corps volunteer--went to use the bathroom. When he came out, he said to me, "Whoever was in that stall before me was not a healthy person."I think Orly's latest motion is the rhetorical equivalent of what my friend Steve saw in the toilet in Quito that day.

Post by **TexasFilly** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:04 pm

Here's an idea... why don't we all just jump up and one by one point out all of Orly's errors prior to knowing this is filed (it is not on PACER to my knowledge). ](*,)

[hidden]Really. I don't know how much clearer I coulda been. I am going to quit posting stuff like this if our folks here can't contain themselves.[/hidden]

Post by **Sterngard Friegen** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:04 pm

PLEASE STOP CORRECTING TAITZ'S PLEADING!

If you want to do it now, why don't you just contact the Chaleria and volunteer?

I urge people to remove their comments. Restrain yourselves. Remember the monkeys shaved!

Post by **Foggy** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:07 pm

When the -xx just won't do, I reach for thehttp://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee232/foghorn_leghorn_photos/threadsigns/popcorn.jpg

Post by **Foggy** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:08 pm

... Orly's latest motion is the rhetorical equivalent of what my friend Steve saw in the toilet in Quito that day.

Was that Quito Papa?

Paul Lentz · Post by **Paul Lentz** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:10 pm

[sekrit]"there were no [highlight]latches[/highlight]"Now wait a minnit, dammit! If there ain't no latches, then how the hell kin we shut the screen door proper? I guess that explains all the dadgum flies! Okay, who took the doggone latches? :evil:[/sekrit]

Post by **Foggy** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:14 pm

Here's an idea... why don't we all just jump up and one by one point out all of Orly's errors prior to knowing this is filed (it is not on PACER to my knowledge). ](*,)
[hidden]Really. I don't know how much clearer I coulda been. I am going to quit posting stuff like this if our folks here can't contain themselves.[/hidden]

We've seen before that nothing and no one can really help this ignorant fool. Yes, she posts a "draft" to see what our comments and criticisms are. No, she never really makes any substantive changes before she files the brief anyway. Look at the difference between her "draft" of the Motion for Reconsideration itself and the document in final form that she filed with the court. Did our commentary really help her improve that one? [-( =; She's not going to change the tone and the substance of the brief, no matter what we say about it publicly. I think it's a question of 'no harm, no foul'.

Butterfly Bilderberg · Post by **Butterfly Bilderberg** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:23 pm

Compelling to read. I could not put it down. Judge Lamberth will be impressed.

Post by **TexasFilly** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:24 pm

I don't think we should be providing any help. I think that Orly's filing is so good that it should be filed with all of it's original, natural beauty. When those of us who do others here a favor, and go over to Orly's malware infested site, ask folks to restrain themselves from commenting until after filing, and are ignored, it makes one not want to post this stuff. So, we can either post this stuff here in a timely fashion, and others can demonstrate some self-control, or we can just restrict sharing the filings to PMs of selected few. I've always opted to share these with everyone. But I can reverse course if y'all want.

Post by **Mikedunford** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:24 pm

[edit]Pulled potential assistance to Taitz[/edit]

Litlebritdifrnt2 · Post by **Litlebritdifrnt2** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:26 pm

Until I see confirmation that it has been filed I am :-#

Post by **TexasFilly** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:27 pm

Post deleted by moi. ;)

woodworker · Post by **woodworker** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:27 pm

Ummm.. here is a very simple (and probably insanely stupid) IANAL question... Does one have to file a response to everything that the opposition files?
Orly Taitz does.I will not comment substantively until we have confirmation this has been filed. I would urge others here to do the same.

I know you don’t want us to comment, but I would like to see the court address the substantive issue. And I don’t understand why she has not cited Anthem v. Carrier Service, 517 F. Supp. 4d 81 (D.D.C. 2010) as authority and support for her claim of having the right to introduce newly discovered evidence. It seems to me that the facts in Anthem are as close to being on point to the current facts as one could hope, particularly as it relates to the standard for determining whether a party seeking to introduce newly discovered evidence has satisfied their duty of due diligence.

BFB · Post by **BFB** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:33 pm

[color=#FF0000][size=200]Remember the monkeys shaved!

:shock:

Butterfly Bilderberg · Post by **Butterfly Bilderberg** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:49 pm

woodworker, I wondered about that myself. I've seen the case cited by others in recent filings. However, I'm not going to point the compass to those cases and assist Orly.

Myron · Post by **Myron** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:56 pm

That is powerful writing. If Orly files this, I imagine that all the US Attorneys will resign in disgrace and join her staff. Judge Lamberth will likely commit hari-kari on the courthouse steps.What court filings need, as it turns out, is more arrogance, incompetence, and dripping sarcasm.Question: is "de facto" the only legal phrase that she knows?

verbalobe · Post by **verbalobe** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:57 pm

Compelling to read. I could not put it down. Judge Lamberth will be impressed.

I agree. I got all the way to the 3rd paragraph. There must be a scale, like the Richter scale, that records the relative power of a legal argument. Isn't there? I imagine so! Is it the BZ scale? I think it is.This filing (when it's filed) may top 5.9 on the BZ Scale. It will really shake things up.

Post by **Foggy** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:58 pm

Sadly enough it is not a laughing matter. :lol:

BFB · Post by **BFB** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:13 pm

Judge Lamberth will likely commit ~~hari-kar~~i hara-kiri on the courthouse steps.

FIFY. Hari Kari used to be the voice of the Chicago Cubs ... ;)

woodworker · Post by **woodworker** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:38 pm

When is the reply due?

Post by **Sterngard Friegen** » Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:44 pm

Seppuku.