Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 565 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 23  Next   
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:28 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
This should be good...

From the Liberty Legal Foundation

No Certification Without Verification

Quote:
On 10/25/11 Liberty Legal Foundation filed two simultaneous lawsuits against the Democratic Party. Both lawsuits request injunctions prohibiting the Party from certifying that Obama is Constitutionally qualified to run for the office of President in the 2012 election. Without such a certification from the Party, Obama will not appear on any ballot in the 2012 general election.

Neither lawsuit discuss Obama’s place of birth or his birth certificate. These issues are completely irrelevant to our argument. LLF’s lawsuit simply points out that the Supreme Court has defined “natural-born citizen” as a person born to two parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the natural-born citizen’s birth. Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Obama can never be a natural-born citizen. His place of birth is irrelevant.

[snip]

We also learned that Presidential candidates that are registered with the Federal Election Commission have standing to ask a court to keep another candidate off the ballot. That’s why two of our lead plaintiffs are FEC-registered Presidential Candidates.

Because we have lead plaintiffs that are FEC-registered Presidential Candidates, and because those plaintiffs are also Liberty Legal members, Liberty Legal has standing to sue as well.

Because we have lead plaintiffs that are FEC-registered Presidential Candidates, you can join our lawsuit as a class member and be part of this challenge. If one plaintiff has standing to sue, all plaintiffs have standing to sue. We have a class for all people that object to having a Presidential candidate appear on the ballot who is not Constitutionally qualified to hold the office of President. If you agree that the Constitution should be followed, please add your voice to ours. Please join our class action lawsuit to protect the legitimacy of the ballot.


bold emphasis original - highlighting mine

A class action lawsuit... errrr lawsuits eh?

Sit back for a couple of years or so while they attempt to certify a class. :P

They've also studied all the previous cases and have learned how to avoid all the pitfalls all the other genius attorneys befell. One of those is to sue the DNC and avoid those nasty state and federal gubimints.

Edit: ETA: While they say they filed two suits today, I found no link to any documents nor any listing of a caption or captions or jurisdiction, or jurisdictions, etc.

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:04 am
Posts: 5234
Their previous post is a doozy as well

Quote:
Late last month Liberty Legal Foundation filed a motion in the Obamacare Class Action lawsuit asking the Texas Federal Court to ignore the 1942 Supreme Court precedent Wickard v. Filburn. Asking a District Court to ignore Supreme Court precedent is highly unusual but we believe it’s justified in this case. Because Wickard was a politically-motivated decision that reversed 150 years of prior precedent, we feel justified in asking the Court to ignore Wickard and honor the clear language of the Constitution.

We expect the District Court to be reluctant to grant our motion, so we gave it an alternative. Our motion reminds the District Court that if it agrees that Wickard should be reconsidered, but it doesn’t believe that it has the authority to overturn Wickard itself, the District Court can still tell the higher courts what it thinks about Wickard. If the District Court follows our suggestion we would be allowed to immediately bring the case to the next higher court, and we would have a statement from the District Court questioning the validity of Wickard. Such a statement would make the higher courts much more likely to rule in our favor. Our filing and the update we sent to you after filing our motion can both be seen on Liberty Legal’s web site.

...

The defendant’s response to our latest motion had no surprises for us. We got exactly what we expected. Their opposition focused primarily on the same arguments they had made in their previous motion to dismiss. They claimed that none of Liberty Legal’s over 30,000 members have standing to challenge Obamacare. This argument had already been addressed and negated by our previous response to their motion, filed last July.

...

The best part of the defendants’ response to our motion was this: they still argue that “Under plaintiffs’ extreme view, even Medicare would be unconstitutional. There is no such categorical shackle on the power of Congress.” Wow! The defendants have proven once again that they haven’t bothered to read the Constitution. Article I section 8 is exactly a categorical shackle on the power of Congress. That is its express purpose. For 150 years the Supreme Court agreed that the “commerce clause” was NOT intended to remove all shackles on Congressional power. Such an interpretation of the commerce clause is absurd in light of Article I section 8. Essentially the defendants argue that the Founding Fathers wanted to limit the power of Congress, and then in the same sentence remove all such limitations. This is simply ludicrous. Yet this is how the Wickard Court interpreted the Constitution. Once again the defendants have made our point for us: they actively argue that Wickard’s interpretation of the commerce clause leaves “no such categorical shackle on the power of Congress.”

Amazing isn’t it?


Bolding in original. More at the link.

So their case is to ask the court to ignore the ruling that makes their case fall to bits. Wow! Maybe they should ask the court to ignore Wonk Kim Ark and the 14th amendment and rule inder Dredd vs Scott too?

_________________
You cannot kill what has no life...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 1:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Posts: 19882
Location: FEMA Camp 17 -- Malibu (Hey! You! Get off the lawn!)
Occupation: Schadenfreude artist.
A Rule 23(b)(2) class action, seeking class wide relief, does not require the same showing as a (b)(1) class where each class member must prove his/her right to the stake. So, certification won't be delayed on that basis. However, each class member must have standing. That's going to be a big hurdle -- for all plaintiffs.

Since the Democratic Party is a defendant, these cases will be disposed of very quickly. They aren't "ripe" and plaintiffs have no standing. Of course, on the legal issue, if they ever got there, they're wrong.

Edit: Based on what these bubbleheads have on their website, their lead counsel is none other than Van Irion, one of the top birther lawyers in the world. In fact, he's never lost a birther case -- yet.

_________________
When there are a finite number of ways to screw something up, Orly Taitz will find an infinite number of ways to do so. (The Sternsig Rule.)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 3:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 1:27 am
Posts: 1665
Location: Southern Gondwana
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
A Rule 23(b)(2) class action, seeking class wide relief, does not require the same showing as a (b)(1) class where each class member must prove his/her right to the stake. So, certification won't be delayed on that basis. However, each class member must have standing. That's going to be a big hurdle -- for all plaintiffs.

Since the Democratic Party is a defendant, these cases will be disposed of very quickly. They aren't "ripe" and plaintiffs have no standing. Of course, on the legal issue, if they ever got there, they're wrong.

Edit: Based on what these bubbleheads have on their website, their lead counsel is none other than Van Irion, one of the top birther lawyers in the world. In fact, he's never lost a birther case -- yet.

Which of course raises the question:- How many birther cases has he filed?
Regards ..............Dick


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:01 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Posts: 10968
Location: Stalag 13 Okanagan, WA 98840
Occupation: Drone Maintenance Officer - FAA Licensed and Certified "We Fix Drones©" Call (206) 622-0460 to schedule routine maintenance or repair.
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
A Rule 23(b)(2) class action, seeking class wide relief, does not require the same showing as a (b)(1) class where each class member must prove his/her right to the stake. So, certification won't be delayed on that basis. However, each class member must have standing. That's going to be a big hurdle -- for all plaintiffs.

Since the Democratic Party is a defendant, these cases will be disposed of very quickly. They aren't "ripe" and plaintiffs have no standing. Of course, on the legal issue, if they ever got there, they're wrong.

Edit: Based on what these bubbleheads have on their website, their lead counsel is none other than Van Irion, one of the top birther lawyers in the world. In fact, he's never lost a birther case -- yet.


Has he even been involved in any birfer cases :?: :?: :?: or that just understood from the "never lost"????

_________________
Image ImageImage

You can follow the action, which gets you good pictures.
You can follow your instincts, which'll probably get you in trouble.

Or... you can follow the money...
which nine times out of ten will get you closer to the truth.
"The Two Jakes"


Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:50 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Quote:
Their previous post is a doozy as well


Late last month Liberty Legal Foundation filed a motion in the Obamacare Class Action lawsuit asking the Texas Federal Court to ignore the 1942 Supreme Court precedent Wickard v. Filburn. Asking a District Court to ignore Supreme Court precedent is highly unusual but we believe it’s justified in this case. Because Wickard was a politically-motivated decision that reversed 150 years of prior precedent, we feel justified in asking the Court to ignore Wickard and honor the clear language of the Constitution.


The case was originally filed in the EDTN and was tossed on the papers. They then (admittedly) went judge shopping and "re-filed" in the NDTX. The case is Enloe, et al. v Obama, et al.
U.S. District Court
Northern District of Texas (Lubbock)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:11-cv-00026-C

The last update they give their peeps is:

Quote:
7/7/11 – Liberty Legal Foundation files PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO FILE NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY and PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO FILE NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY


The real status of the case from that date forward is:

Quote:
09/28/2011 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment or Alternatively a Statement Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) filed by Liberty Legal Foundation (Irion, Van) (Entered: 09/28/2011)

09/28/2011 21 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Liberty Legal Foundation re 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment or Alternatively a Statement Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) (Irion, Van) (Entered: 09/28/2011)

09/28/2011 22 Appendix in Support filed by Liberty Legal Foundation re 21 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (Irion, Van) (Entered: 09/28/2011)

10/04/2011 23 PRETRIAL NOTICE AND ORDER: Jury Trial set for 8/13/2012 at 09:00 AM in US Courthouse, Courtroom C-216, 1205 Texas Avenue, Lubbock, TX 79401-4091 before Judge Sam R Cummings. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 10/4/2011) (cb) (Entered: 10/04/2011)

10/19/2011 24 OBJECTION filed by Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Kathleen Sebelius, United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States of America re: 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment or Alternatively a Statement Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Kennedy, Brian) (Entered: 10/19/2011)

10/19/2011 25 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Kathleen Sebelius, United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States of America re 24 Response/Objection, (Kennedy, Brian) (Entered: 10/19/2011)

10/19/2011 26 Appendix in Support filed by Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Kathleen Sebelius, United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States of America re 24 Response/Objection, (Kennedy, Brian) (Entered: 10/19/2011)


So if they wish, (AFAIK) the Plaintiffs may file a response to the Defendants' Objection to the Motion for Summary Judgment or Alternatively a Statement and then the case will await a decision on Summary Judgment.

Mr. Van Irion tried to pull a Berg and be granted pro hac vice without following the rules requiring local counsel. He did finally obtain local counsel in one Mr. Robert S. Hogan.

Robert S Hogan
Hogan Law Firm, PC
PO Box 2277
Lubbock, TX 79408-2277
806/771-7900
Fax: 806/771-7925
Email: robert@hogan.us
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Plaintiff


Mr. Hogan is a Personal Injury (PI) attorney in Lubbock. Another obvious Konstitushonal Emergency expert.
http://www.lubbockinjurylaw.com/
Quote:
Practice Areas

We have provided skilled and aggressive legal representation for more than fourteen years to clients in West Texas and Eastern New Mexico for a variety of personal injury, civil cases, and other areas of law. Among the types of cases we handle are:

Wrongful Death: If you have lost a loved one due to the mistakes or negligence of another.
Auto and Truck Wrecks: Car crashes and trucking accidents can result in very serious injuries.
Insurance Claims: Underinsured motorist, uninsured motorist, life insurance, and other first-party insurance claims.
Medical Bill Reduction: Unpaid medical bills can be a burden on any family. We may be able to help obtain reduction/discounts on medical bills under some circumstances.
Other Practice Areas: Train wrecks, drunk driving wrecks, cotton gin injuries, dangerous and defective products, deceptive trade practices, civil rights issues, sexual assault and more.


Basically sounds like a door lawyer. His firm consists of himself and what I, SECR, "lovingly" refer to as a "baby lawyer," having graduated law school in 2009.

Quote:
02/14/2011 5 CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING to 3 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Cert. of Good Standing for Attorney Van R. Irion (Filing fee $25; Receipt number LU004399)Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Cert. of Good Standing for Attorney Van R. Irion (Filing fee $25; Receipt number LU004399). (jdg) (Entered: 02/14/2011)

02/15/2011 6 ORDER denying 3 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Van R. Irion. Mr. Irion shall have fourteen (14) days to re-file his Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with the proper certification; otherwise, the pleadings filed on behalf of Plaintiffs will be unfiled. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 2/15/2011) (jdg) Modified on 2/15/2011 (jdg). (Entered: 02/15/2011)

02/16/2011 7 ORDER: Construing Mr. Irion's response on the Application as a motion for leave to proceed without local counsel, the Court DENIES the same. (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 2/16/2011) (jdg) (Entered: 02/16/2011)

02/28/2011 8 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Robert S Hogan on behalf of All Plaintiffs. (Hogan, Robert) (Entered: 02/28/2011)

02/28/2011 9 AMENDED Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Cert. of Good Standing for Attorney Van R. Irion (Filing fee $25; Receipt number LU004399) (jdg) (Entered: 02/28/2011)

03/09/2011 10 ORDER granting 9 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Van R. Irion. Clerk shall deposit application fee to the Non-Appropriated Fund of this Court. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Judge Sam R Cummings on 3/9/2011) (jdg) (Entered: 03/09/2011)


There also was a Motion to Dismiss filed by the Defendants in May...

Quote:
05/31/2011 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Eric Holder, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Kathleen Sebelius, United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States of America (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order (Jurisdiction), # 2 Proposed Order (Venue), # 3 Proposed Order (Failure to State a Claim)) (Kennedy, Brian) (Entered: 05/31/2011)


All responses were filed by late June, and then in September 28, 2011 the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Summary Judgment.

The Motion to Dismiss filed in May has not yet been ruled on.

There is a Scheduling Order and a jury trial has been scheduled for 8/13/2012.

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 7:58 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Having been filed only yesterday, and assuming they filed in federal court, it's too early for them to appear, but I find no new federal lawsuits filed against the DNC on PACER at this time. I'll keep a watch over the next few days.

That is all. :D

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13560
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
Until we see that something has actually been filed, a reasonable guess would be that this is a fund-raising ploy. The Make a Donation button looms in the upper right corner in deep red. There is a fake survey on GOP candidates (fake in the sense that sampling is not random; replies are from volunteers). Then the bottom of the page sells t-shirts and other memorabilia.

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm
Posts: 7259
Location: Intersection of Godwin Dr. and Poe Blvd.
Occupation: Personal security.
Offtopic :
So much of the birferstani rank and file fall prey to this fallacious reasoning:

Quote:
"...There is no such categorical shackle on the power of Congress.” Wow! The defendants have proven once again that they haven’t bothered to read the Constitution. Article I section 8 is exactly a categorical shackle on the power of Congress. That is its express purpose. For 150 years the Supreme Court agreed that the “commerce clause” was NOT intended to remove all shackles on Congressional power.

  • SCOTUS says the commerce clause allows some shackles to remain
  • (Missing magical incantation)
  • Therefore this particular shackle remains.
They suffer a similar brain-function failure with Minor, where it says (paraphrase) there has never been any doubt about the NBC-ness of people born on American soil to citizen parents. They think:
  • SCOTUS stated* that people born on American soil to citizen parents are NBC
  • (Magical word reversal empowered by anti-Obama fairy dust)
  • SCOTUS stated that NBC's are people born on American soil to citizen parents.
(*The fallacious reasoning is of course aside from many other problems with their reading of Minor, e.g., they don't actually read it, they don't know HOW to read it, they think 'stated' = 'ruled', etc., etc.)

But I see this fallacious reasoning not just among the Birfer lawyers, and not just among the lowlights that have from time to time engaged on PJ and TFB, but among masses of regular everyday RWNJs commenting on facebook. They read junk from the birfer bloggers, or hear it on the radio, and despite self-evident logical flaws, they just drink it up and regurgitate it as fact.

It makes me very depressed about our citizenry's capacity to manage serious matters of policy, environment, budget, etc. It's like the education machine broke down LONG ago, and we're a nation of idiots.

It's a good thing Vattel prescribes universal, free, compulsory, government-sponsored schooling!

_________________
ImageImageImageImage
"You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of unsound mind, a dimension of unreality, a dimension of really, really bad law. You've just crossed over into the Orly Zone." -- Geritol

ZOOM IN, BABY. IT'S ALL WRONG.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:03 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Prior suits agains the DNC have not fared well nor lasted very long...

Quote:
Party Name Court Case NOS Date Filed Date Closed

1 Democratic National Party (dft) casdce 3:2004-cv-01825 440 09/13/2004 09/15/2004
Ball v. Democratic National

2 Democratic National Party (dft) hidce 1:2008-cv-00232 440 05/19/2008 07/24/2008
Roy v. Association formed in 2007 as conglomerate of indepent 1000+ unincorporated small and poorly financed disadvantaged peoples et al

3 Democratic National Party (dft) ilcdce 4:2009-cv-04031 441 05/06/2009 06/22/2009
Roy v. Obama et al

4 Democratic National Party (dft) vaedce 2:2009-cv-00490 440 10/02/2009 10/28/2009

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:18 am
Posts: 192
There is no mention of required citizenship of parents in the USC - are these just some new money grabbing PayPal donation seekers - looking for Christmas money, maybe..... their timing seems to be about right. Why didn't they join up with Orly - oh scratch that one. I'm going with Christmas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm
Posts: 3955
Location: Southwest of down east
realist wrote:
Prior suits agains the DNC have not fared well nor lasted very long...

Quote:
Party Name Court Case NOS Date Filed Date Closed

<snip>
2 Democratic National Party (dft) hidce 1:2008-cv-00232 440 05/19/2008 07/24/2008
Roy v. Association formed in 2007 as conglomerate of indepent 1000+ unincorporated small and poorly financed disadvantaged peoples et al

3 Democratic National Party (dft) ilcdce 4:2009-cv-04031 441 05/06/2009 06/22/2009
Roy v. Obama et al


Our rookie Constitutional Patent Lawyer at LLF has a lot to learn about filing nutjob lawsuits. He might want to pick up some pointers from the plaintiff in Cases #2 & 3 above -- one Kamal Karna Roy (A/K/A Joseph Geronimo, Jr.; Jungle Democracy; Reforms International; Karnal Karna Roy; Kamal K. K. Roy; and K. K. K. Roy). Now here's what the resume of a seasoned veteran looks like.

A full listing of the defendants in Case #2 is instructive:
Quote:
Association Formed in 2007 as Conglomerate of Independent 1000+ Unincorporated Small and Poorly Financed Disadvantaged People, USA Government Washington D.C., John McCain, Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Judges of the District Court, USA Constitution, UN Plaza, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, Democratic Super Delegates, Republican National Party, Democratic National Party, All Religions in Washington D.C., All Giant News Conglomerates, All News Media of USA, We the People of USA to whom it may concern, All 50 United States, All State Board of Elections in USA, All Territories of USA and U.S. Judiciary of U.S. Supreme Court


I wonder how he went about serving "All Religions in Washington D.C." or "All News Media of USA".

_________________
Hope springs eternal within the human uniboob. - Thomas Jefferson.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 12:04 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Piffle wrote...
Quote:
A full listing of the defendants in Case #2 is instructive:

Association Formed in 2007 as Conglomerate of Independent 1000+ Unincorporated Small and Poorly Financed Disadvantaged People, USA Government Washington D.C., John McCain, Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Judges of the District Court, USA Constitution, UN Plaza, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, Democratic Super Delegates, Republican National Party, Democratic National Party, All Religions in Washington D.C., All Giant News Conglomerates, All News Media of USA, We the People of USA to whom it may concern, All 50 United States, All State Board of Elections in USA, All Territories of USA and U.S. Judiciary of U.S. Supreme Court



I wonder how he went about serving "All Religions in Washington D.C." or "All News Media of USA".


In fact, how he served the vast majority of the listed defendants.

This appears to be nothing more than a "vanity" lawsuit to get/keep the PayPal button going.

He will soon be the next great hope of Birfistan, he'll get some birfer bucks, but will lose, and most likely join Orly's stance of all the court/judges, etc. are corrupt and complicit it Obamagate fraud. :lol:

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:26 pm
Posts: 5510
Location: You Sue-We Serve Legal Support Services, 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Honolulu, HI 96813
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Since the Democratic Party is a defendant, these cases will be disposed of very quickly. They aren't "ripe" and plaintiffs have no standing.


This will be interesting. Four plaintiffs -- at least one a Republican and none a Democrat -- trying to persuade the court that they have standing to sue the Democratic Party. For an act that has not yet occurred. Based on this laughable "injury":

Quote:
Absent this Court’s grant of the requested relief, Plaintiff John Dummett will be concretely and continuously harmed as direct and proximate result of the defendant’s actions and failures to act, because the appearance of Barrack Obama’s name appearing on Ballots for the 2012 general election would result in votes for Mr. Obama that would otherwise be cast for Mr. Dummett.


Yeah, right. Obama is siphoning the birther vote away from you, Johnnie.


=)) =)) =)) =)) =)) x a gazillion


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

_________________
“I can assure you that already in the Pavlovian swamps of the nutso right, the glands are swelling. Theirs is a different planet from the one you and I inhabit. ” - Newsweek/Daily Beast special correspondent and editor of Democracy: A Journal of Ideas, Michael Tomasky, May 12, 2013


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:43 am
Posts: 112
Occupation: Community Organizer?
I hope Rule 11 pops up.

_________________
Balak combines boundless assurance and a fixed idea — a dangerous mixture. In his fixed idea, Balak is like Captain Ahab in Melville's Moby Dick. In his irrational overconfidence, he resembles Maugham's "Hairless Mexican" . Balak is both. Is any man is so dangerous as him? From, Save The Whales & Anna Caypor, Executrix for the Estate of Grantley Caypor v. Balak


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:13 pm
Posts: 1941
Location: Unfortunately, deep in the Bible Belt
realist wrote:


Mr. Hogan is a Personal Injury (PI) attorney in Lubbock. Another obvious Konstitushonal Emergency expert.
http://www.lubbockinjurylaw.com/
Quote:
Practice Areas

We have provided skilled and aggressive legal representation for more than fourteen years to clients in West Texas and Eastern New Mexico for a variety of personal injury, civil cases, and other areas of law. Among the types of cases we handle are:

Wrongful Death: If you have lost a loved one due to the mistakes or negligence of another.
Auto and Truck Wrecks: Car crashes and trucking accidents can result in very serious injuries.
Insurance Claims: Underinsured motorist, uninsured motorist, life insurance, and other first-party insurance claims.
Medical Bill Reduction: Unpaid medical bills can be a burden on any family. We may be able to help obtain reduction/discounts on medical bills under some circumstances.
Other Practice Areas: Train wrecks, drunk driving wrecks, cotton gin injuries, dangerous and defective products, deceptive trade practices, civil rights issues, sexual assault and more.


Finally, a lawyer with the necessary experience to handle birthers. :lol:

_________________
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:43 am
Posts: 112
Occupation: Community Organizer?
Does this poor SOB know what he is getting into? 500 calls per day from Birthers across the nation. FAX machine run out of paper nightly with Birfer law briefs from the likes of Border Raven and Pissed Off Vet.

_________________
Balak combines boundless assurance and a fixed idea — a dangerous mixture. In his fixed idea, Balak is like Captain Ahab in Melville's Moby Dick. In his irrational overconfidence, he resembles Maugham's "Hairless Mexican" . Balak is both. Is any man is so dangerous as him? From, Save The Whales & Anna Caypor, Executrix for the Estate of Grantley Caypor v. Balak


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 7:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 2570
Location: In exile in NOVA
Probably nothing but I'm just getting a blank screen when I go to Liberty Legal Foundation's website this morning.

_________________
They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. – Carl Sagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:00 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Welsh Dragon wrote:
Probably nothing but I'm just getting a blank screen when I go to Liberty Legal Foundation's website this morning.


I tried after just reading your post and I get redirected...
Quote:
Brid1957
Just another WordPress site

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 2570
Location: In exile in NOVA
realist wrote:
Welsh Dragon wrote:
Probably nothing but I'm just getting a blank screen when I go to Liberty Legal Foundation's website this morning.


I tried after just reading your post and I get redirected...
Quote:
Brid1957
Just another WordPress site


Same here now - seems someone's messing with the intertubes this morning.

_________________
They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. – Carl Sagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:01 am
Posts: 18509
Location: Planet Earth (most the time)
Occupation: I'm not at liberty to say. In other words, I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.
ZorbasLeGreque wrote:
Orly writes about this (and she gets it right imo):

xxxhttp://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=26948


For those who don't go to Orly's:

Quote:
What about John Dummett, why he does not have standing or case against Obama

Posted on | October 26, 2011 | 1 Comment

A number of people have asked me about this gentleman, John Dummett, what do I think about him and his attempt to find standing in court.

I am sure Mr. Dummett is a good person, I wish him all the best, but he does not have standing. I was contacted by Mr. Dummett and a couple of his friends probably a couple of months ago. His two friends wanted to travel from FL, where they reside, to CA, in order to persuade me to file a class action law suit with Mr. Dummett as a lead plaintiff, they wanted me to take this case and represent Mr. Dummett.

I explained to them, that first and foremost, during the primary neither he, nor even legitimate candidates on the ballot, do not have standing to challenge Obama. Even, if Romney, Cain and Perry wanted to sue Obama today and seek adjudication of the BC issue, they cannot do it during the primary, as they do not face Obama during the Primary, they face each other, so the judge will say, that the law suit is just hypothetical, conjectural, not ripe. Republican nominee can sue Obama later during the general election, but not during the Primary.

2. From what I understand, Mr. Dummett simply filled out a one page form, saying that he has an intention to run for President. Most people do not know, that there are some 250-260 people, who simply filled out this one page form and are considered candidates for President, however, it is really nothing. In order to even run in the Primary, one has to be on the ballot. In order to be on the ballot, one has to pay necessary fees. For example, in order to run for Senate and have my name on the ballot in one state, in CA, I need to pay $3420 to the state of CA. In order to run for President, one has to pay a fee in each and every state. As far as I know, John Dummett did not pay fees yet and he is not on the ballot yet.

Now, if I know of 250 people, who simply filled out 1 page form, so do the judges, and they look at the case accordingly, they understand, that these people are not even on the ballot. Again, even if he were to pay the fees in each and every state and get on the ballot, he cannot face Obama in the primary.


Sorry... 4 paragraphs and all that.

_________________
Yes We Can! ~ Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:59 pm
Posts: 8004
Location: HQ Email/Website Hacking Dept, located in the basement of a Liberal-Socialist-Swine Ivory Tower
Occupation: College Instructor; Psychologist
Ok, I really am going to use the word that I almost never use ....

These people must be retarded. Even Orly thinks they're retarded.

=)) =)) =)) =)) =)) =))

Good lord; I love how this group has this "We got him now! :-bd " attitude.

And regarding the paypal issue; this group will earn little $ because there aren't enough birfers who believe in the court system anymore. They know we (well, with Soros bucks), paid off every court in the nation.


This will end .... hilariously!! -xx

I think I shall only buy 2 boxes of popcorn for this suit. It won't last long enough for a pallet.

_________________
"I have a Ph.D in horribleness."Dr. Horrible of the Evil League of Evil
"The birthers are particularly good at puting two and two together and coming up with aardvark."Pat Gund


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:27 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Quote:
U.S. District Court
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (Phoenix Division)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv-02089-SRB

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA Incorporated et al
Assigned to: Judge Susan R Bolton
Cause: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgment
Date Filed: 10/25/2011
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 360 P.I.: Other
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Liberty Legal Foundation represented by Van Irion
Liberty Legal Foundation
9040 Executive Park Dr., Ste. 223
Knoxville, TN 37923
865-809-1505
Fax: 865-531-9149
Email: van@libertylegalfoundation.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
John Dummett represented by Van Irion
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Leonard Volodarsky represented by Van Irion
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Creg Maroney represented by Van Irion
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

Defendant
National Democratic Party of the USA Incorporated

Defendant
Debbie Wasserman Schultz

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am
Posts: 4216
It's ON! -xx

_________________
@Orly: "No one is listening to you anymore. And that’s the way it should always be." - Scott J. Tepper (11/5/2012)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:36 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23519
Docket Entries to Date...

Quote:
10/25/2011 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $350.00, receipt number PHX 0970-5978115, filed by Liberty Legal Foundation, John Dummett, Creg Maroney, Leonard Volodarsky (submitted by Van Irion). (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(REK) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/25/2011 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Liberty Legal Foundation (submitted by Van Irion). (Attachments: # 1 Page 2)(REK) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/25/2011 3 SUMMONS Submitted by John Dummett, Liberty Legal Foundation, Creg Maroney, Leonard Volodarsky (submitted by Van Irion). (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(REK) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/25/2011 4 MOTION for Admission Pro Hac Vice as to attorney Van Irion by John Dummett, Liberty Legal Foundation, Creg Maroney, Leonard Volodarsky (submitted by Van Irion). (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(REK) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/25/2011 5 Filing fee paid, receipt number PHX 0970-5978115. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Susan R. Bolton. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV 11-02089-PHX-SRB. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (REK) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/26/2011 6 Summons Issued as to National Democratic Party of the USA Incorporated, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(REK). *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/26/2011 PRO HAC VICE FEE PAID. $ 50, receipt number PHX115100 as to Van Irion. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAS) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

10/26/2011 7 ORDER pursuant to General Order 09-08 granting 4 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. Per the Court's Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual, applicant has five (5) days in which to register as a user of the Electronic Filing System. Registration to be accomplished via the court's website at www.azd.uscourts.gov. (BAS)(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 10/26/2011)

_________________
Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.
John Adams


ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 565 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 23  Next   

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
View new posts | View active topics



Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group