Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 152 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next   
Author Message
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Posts: 9170
Location: Supreme Court of clerks
Occupation: Petite treason procurer
Taitz never disappoints!:
Quote:
petition to the Supreme Court of New Hampshire

In the link is the petition to the Supreme court of New Hampshire. Here are some clarifications. After I filed a ballot challenge with the ballot law commission, multiple individuals wrote to the commission, seeking to join in that challenge. It is impossible for me to add everyone as named plaintiffs, so several State Representatives and presidential candidates were joined as named plaintiffs, as they have strong standing. Additionally on page 17-18 I requested a class certification. When such class certification is granted by the court, all of the members of the class become plaintiffs. Previously there were some concerns, as in a couple of cases I added a few people as named plaintiffs. It happened so, that in one of the cases names were arranged in alphabetical order and one person, whose name was first ended up being a lead plaintiff and got a lot of recognition and notariaty, while other people fell into obscurity. By leaving as named plaintiffsonly ones, who have strong standing and asking for class certification for other plaintiffs, I treat everybody evenly, no favorites, no hurt feelings and everything is in even key.

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28766

Did you know Taitz was granted PHV in New Hampshire? She's representing clients (excuse me, in propria persona co-plaintiffs), i.e. Rappaport, Accornero, Vita, Vita, Villenueva, Lax, MacLeran, and Judy.

:-

Also:
Quote:
A request for stay of the decision pending review by the Supreme Court was submitted to the Sec of State of NH and the Ballot Law Commission

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28770


The petition:

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Taitz-v-Gardner-Ballot-Law-Commission-Supreme-Court-of-New-Hampshire.pdf

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image

ASSUME ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE WILL END UP ON TAITZ'S SITE AND FACEBOOK. AND JEROME CORSI WILL POST SCREENSHOTS TO WND. AND WILL BE FILED BY A BIRTHER AS AN EXHIBIT IN FEDERAL COURT. NOW HAVE FUN!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm
Posts: 3983
Location: Southwest of down east
bob wrote:
Taitz never disappoints!:
Quote:
petition to the Supreme Court of New Hampshire
<snip>
By leaving as named plaintiffs only ones, who have strong standing and asking for class certification for other plaintiffs, I treat everybody evenly, no favorites, no hurt feelings and everything is in even key.


Sounds like a good way to get key hauled for UPL.

And there it is, right smack at the top of the first page: her CA bar number. -xx

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:59 pm
Posts: 8012
Location: HQ Email/Website Hacking Dept, located in the basement of a Liberal-Socialist-Swine Ivory Tower
Occupation: College Instructor; Psychologist
bob wrote:
Previously there were some concerns, as in a couple of cases I added a few people as named plaintiffs. {snip} I treat everybody evenly, no favorites, no hurt feelings and everything is in even key.

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28766
[/quote]

Maybe I am reading this incorrectly. Is Orly saying that she added people without their approval? As we all suspected she had?

It appears that she really pissed some birfers off in previous cases. Every had "hurt feelings". :lol: I guess we can't all be lead plaintiffs!!

Good luck with this, Orly. I'm certain that you will have just as much success in this case as you have in others.

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

_________________
"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  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 4:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm
Posts: 3983
Location: Southwest of down east
LM K wrote:
bob wrote:
Previously there were some concerns, as in a couple of cases I added a few people as named plaintiffs. {snip} I treat everybody evenly, no favorites, no hurt feelings and everything is in even key.


Maybe I am reading this incorrectly. Is Orly saying that she added people without their approval? As we all suspected she had?


Oooh, what an interesting bone to chew on, LM_K. While I don't think that can be deduced conclusively from the language, it's possible that's what was in her head when she wrote that. OTOH, I suppose she could claim that she agreed to take on "weak clients" at their bequest. I dunno.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 5:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm
Posts: 3983
Location: Southwest of down east
bob wrote:
Also:
Quote:
A request for stay of the decision pending review by the Supreme Court was submitted to the Sec of State of NH and the Ballot Law Commission

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28770


So Orly thinks that the SecState of NH has some sort of judicial/quasi-judicial authority to stay a decision of the BLC pending review by the NH Supremes? =)) =)) =)) ](*,) ](*,)

Heh, a stay would preserve the status quo ante (with Obama on the ballot) whereas implementation of the decision would leave NH with...drum roll...Obama on the ballot. What could possibly be more important to the nation than this? It's an emergency request, I tell ya.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:36 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm
Posts: 3497
Orly must use meth.

_________________
"What are you talking about, 99? We have to shoot and kill and destroy - we represent everything that's wholesome and good in the world." - Maxwell Smart
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:52 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23560
I posted this in the NH Election Challenge thread but I'll cross-post here. Jack has the appeal up at his place also. Too.

Orly's appeal to the NH Supreme Court. :lol:

At Jack's:
Taitz v Gardner, Ballot Law Commission Supreme Court of New Hampshire


](*,) ](*,) ](*,)

I know it's really Taitz v Cook but Taitz v Gardner is the way super-duper attorney Taitz has it listed on her site. :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  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 8:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 6:04 pm
Posts: 1994
Location: Soviet Canuckistan
Occupation: I'm the Grand Panjandrum of the uber-sekrit cabal that controls our faithful puppet George Soros, the Trilateral Commission, and Agenda 21 (among other things) as part of our grand plan to dominate maple syrup production.
Orly wrote:
Petitioners assert that the ballot law commission showed such a complete disregard of law and fact, such an unprecedented level of malice and corruption, that it justifies the Supreme Court of the state of New Hampshire to take original jurisdiction and appoint a special prosecutor to see if criminal charges are warranted against the Respondents.

I haven't been following Orly as closely as I would like but she seems to be in a manic phase. It's really bringing out her inner Soviet. I know that she's demanded to be appointed special prosecutor before, but maybe it's just the whole volume of accusations that seem to be mounting. I hope that I'm reading the tea leaves correctly in Hawai'i and New Hampshire that at least some folks there are taking a dim view of her antics.
Orly wrote:
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire is an administrative body, reviewing professional misconduct of members of the New Hampshire bar and deciding upon the discipline of attorneys who violate the rules of ethics.Petitioners are seeking review of actions of these three attorneys, for violation of professional rules of ethics and professional code of conduct.The most egregious violation is one by attorney Martha Van Oot, who is a donor for the candidate that is the subject of the hearing. Ms. Van Oot had an ethical obligation to recuse herself from the hearing on the eligibility of the candidate and failed to disclose the conflict of interest and to recuse herself.

Yeah Orly, who'd ever have guessed that a Democrat selected to sit on a commission had, you know, donated three years ago to the Democratic presidential candidate.
Edit: Need Coffee

_________________
It is easy to hope when things go right. Harder to choose to believe in it when things are blackest. However even the greatest darkness can be slain with the faintest of lights. And hope is more than enough to flicker in the dark.

I blog about my life and mental health issues @ Life of a Schizophrenic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 9:31 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:30 pm
Posts: 2460
Location: Virginia
Occupation: FEMA Camp Activities & Re-Education Coordinator.
Hektor wrote:
Orly wrote:
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire is an administrative body, reviewing professional misconduct of members of the New Hampshire bar and deciding upon the discipline of attorneys who violate the rules of ethics.Petitioners are seeking review of actions of these three attorneys, for violation of professional rules of ethics and professional code of conduct. The most egregious violation is one by attorney Martha Van Oot, who is a donor for the candidate that is the subject of the hearing. Ms. Van Oot had an ethical obligation to recuse herself from the hearing on the eligibility of the candidate and failed to disclose the conflict of interest and to recuse herself.


How in the hell does Orly have the nerve to talk about “professional rules of ethics” or the professional code of conduct”? Talk about a pot calling the kettle black! [-(

As for her current manic “rabid squirrel” phase, I believe she knows damn well she’s going to be slammed with sanctions in Hawaii (and hopefully NH too). And that is just eating her ass up because she also knows there isn’t shit she can do about it any more then she could about the sanctions Judge Land slapped her sorry ass with.

_________________
On the June day of 14, 192011.
MsDaisy makes fun of the stupid @: http://crazyinternetpeople.blogspot.com/
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Posts: 19953
Location: FEMA Camp 17 -- Malibu (Hey! You! Get off the lawn!)
Occupation: Schadenfreude artist.
Taitz will not be sanctioned in New Hampshire. Nor in Hawai'i. The judges in those states simply want her out of their lives. So, her lawsuits will be quietly dismissed and Typhoid Orly can move on to the next state. And, I predict that sometime in 2012 the California State Bar will honor Taitz as its Lawyer of the Year.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9369
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Taitz will not be sanctioned in New Hampshire. Nor in Hawai'i. The judges in those states simply want her out of their lives. So, her lawsuits will be quietly dismissed and Typhoid Orly can move on to the next state. And, I predict that sometime in 2012 the California State Bar will honor Taitz as its Lawyer of the Year.


Hawaii has actually moved for sanctions, unlike the defendants in other Orly suits. I think it would be an abuse of discretion to deny them in this case. I am fairly convinced Orly will keep returning to Hawaii until she is sanctioned.

I just don't see how the judge could deny Hawaii's motion requesting that Orly's case be found frivolous, when it clearly is, and I don't see how the judge could then deny costs and fees after Hawaii requests them in a case found to be frivolous.

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 6:36 pm
Posts: 2822
Location: Behind a bathroom door with Cueball
Occupation: Paralegal
I was trying to C&P some choice quotes from Oily's NH pile of poo but scribd crashed my browser :((

WTF is Oily blabbering about when she says that it is "newly discovered evidence" that POTUS is not an NBC? I thought the birfers KNEW that four years ago?

And WTF is with the "search for ballot" website addresses in that mess? ](*,)

_________________
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. -
Thomas Jefferson

http://crittersbybritty.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:13 pm
Posts: 1941
Location: Unfortunately, deep in the Bible Belt
Can the courts order a psych eval for Orly? I know the answer is most likely no, but one can wish -- especially at this time of year. Her motions are being coming more otherworld-like, filled with events that only happened in Orly's twisted mind.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9369
majorbabs wrote:
Can the courts order a psych eval for Orly? I know the answer is most likely no, but one can wish -- especially at this time of year. Her motions are being coming more otherworld-like, filled with events that only happened in Orly's twisted mind.


A court can only order a psychiatric evaluation for a criminal defendant whose competence to stand trial is at issue or who pleads a diminished capacity defense or pleads not guilty by reason of insanity, or if a person's mental health status is a material fact at issue in a case, such as a civil plaintiff claiming some kind of mental impairment as a result of the defendant's actions.

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:19 pm
Posts: 1873
Location: Hollywood (okay, the Valley)
Occupation: Some-time, big-time studio numbers shuffler; full-time gadfly
MsDaisy wrote:
Hektor wrote:
Orly wrote:
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire is an administrative body, reviewing professional misconduct of members of the New Hampshire bar and deciding upon the discipline of attorneys who violate the rules of ethics.Petitioners are seeking review of actions of these three attorneys, for violation of professional rules of ethics and professional code of conduct. The most egregious violation is one by attorney Martha Van Oot, who is a donor for the candidate that is the subject of the hearing. Ms. Van Oot had an ethical obligation to recuse herself from the hearing on the eligibility of the candidate and failed to disclose the conflict of interest and to recuse herself.
quote]

How in the hell does Orly have the nerve to talk about “professional rules of ethics” or the professional code of conduct”? Talk about a pot calling the kettle black! [-(

As for her current manic “rabid squirrel” phase, I believe she knows damn well she’s going to be slammed with sanctions in Hawaii (and hopefully NH too). And that is just eating her ass up because she also knows there isn’t shit she can do about it any more then she could about the sanctions Judge Land slapped her sorry ass with.



My favorite part -- well one of my favorite parts, there are so, so many gems -- is her accusing Jameson of fraud for calling himself a Republican. ("his presence on the commission appear to be achieved by virtue of fraud.") She is back in her Dunn mode again -- how you registered as a Republican which according to law is the standard, you are a de facto Democrat and therefore not a Republican, if Orly deems it so. It is so outrageously fascist of this Soviet slime bag Orly to suggest that she can judge your party, not the record and file LEGAL papers with that as evidence. And that is what gets me the most ... she is so happy to be here in America, but she would turn our nation into another gulag if she could, where associations and non-related and totally legal actions are interpreted as evidence by innuendo and trump the law.

btw, how can she file legal papers in NH? I am other than pro se or whatever they call it? She seems to be acting the lawyer in this ridiculous filing, but wouldn't she have to be admitted to the bar there or get approved to file?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Posts: 9170
Location: Supreme Court of clerks
Occupation: Petite treason procurer
ObjectiveDoubter wrote:
She seems to be acting the lawyer in this ridiculous filing, but wouldn't she have to be admitted to the bar there or get approved to file?

She filed the ballot challenge, which was "joined" by the state reps.

In this lawsuit, Taitz, the state reps, and presidential candidates (that Taitz represents) are all in pro per co-plaintiffs.

This case will be summarily dismissed, so it is doubtful they'll have to maintain this legal fiction for long.


Ghost writing is time-honored tradition in the legal community. But the "ghost" writer usually isn't also a co-litigant.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image

ASSUME ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE WILL END UP ON TAITZ'S SITE AND FACEBOOK. AND JEROME CORSI WILL POST SCREENSHOTS TO WND. AND WILL BE FILED BY A BIRTHER AS AN EXHIBIT IN FEDERAL COURT. NOW HAVE FUN!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 1:36 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 6:06 am
Posts: 4917
Location: Glocca Morra
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Taitz will not be sanctioned in New Hampshire. Nor in Hawai'i. The judges in those states simply want her out of their lives. So, her lawsuits will be quietly dismissed and Typhoid Orly can move on to the next state. And, I predict that sometime in 2012 the California State Bar will honor Taitz as its Lawyer of the Year.


Given what we've seen of the high efficiency, quick to take action speed of the California Bar, it will be "2007 Lawyer of the Year".

_________________
"What's it like being an atheist? It's like being the only sober person in a car full of drunks, and they refuse to let you drive." Thomas Jefferson

Birtherism is so ridiculous that I no longer feel obligated to treat proponents w/slightest degree of respect or civility


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:07 pm
Posts: 1130
Location: not Florida, just a bit east of there....
Occupation: Huntin' Freepers
And, if I'm not mistaken, this is all moot due to the Board's decision being final, with no recourse to judicial review. Keep wasting your time Orly. =D>

_________________
We are all Americans, with the same rights and the same duties, regardless our ethnical background. - The Gospel According To Wilfred Noonan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Posts: 5184
Location: Belize City
Occupation: Visiting doctors.
ObjectiveDoubter wrote:
My favorite part -- well one of my favorite parts, there are so, so many gems -- is her accusing Jameson of fraud for calling himself a Republican. ("his presence on the commission appear to be achieved by virtue of fraud.") She is back in her Dunn mode again -- how you registered as a Republican which according to law is the standard, you are a de facto Democrat and therefore not a Republican, if Orly deems it so. It is so outrageously fascist of this Soviet slime bag Orly to suggest that she can judge your party, not the record and file LEGAL papers with that as evidence.


Not to mention that Jameson French holds the one seat on the BLC that isn't required to be a particular party. His seat is appointed by the Governor and Governor's Council. You'd think in a state with only 1.2 million people, the all-Republican Executive Council might know who's who in their party. (I suspect that people aren't clamoring to be on the BLC though.)

_________________
If a bunch of religious nuts can vote away your fundamental civil rights, then your rights are not self-evident, inalienable, or endowed by God. Quod erat demonstrandum. -- Stonekettle Station
ImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 2573
Location: In exile in NOVA
I've just been trawling through the NH Executive Council minutes for the last few years and it looks as the recent practice has been for the Governor to appoint a member from one party and an alternate from the other and maybe even alternate them.

In 2010 the member, Stephen Dupray (R) resigned, the alternate, Gregory Martin (D) immediately resigned and was nominated and confirmed as the member. A few months later Jameson French (R) was nominated and confirmed as the new alternate for the remainder of Martin's term i.e until July 2013.

(BTW Gregory Martin resigned as member effective 8/1/11 and doesn't seem to have been replaced yet)

Jameson French's appointment was effective from October 2010 so his 2011 political donations do appear to be rather "iffy".

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am
Posts: 2530
NH 665.1

Quote:
I. There shall be a ballot law commission consisting of 5 members. Two members shall be appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives, one from each of the 2 major political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most recent state general election. Two members shall be appointed by the president of the senate, one from each of the 2 major political parties in the state based on votes cast for governor in the most recent state general election. One member shall be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the council, and shall be a person particularly qualified by experience in election procedure. No person shall be appointed to the commission who holds an elected office or who is an election official. The terms of all commissioners shall be for 4 years, except that the first appointments shall be as follows: the members appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives shall be appointed for terms of 2 years, the members appointed by the president of the senate shall be appointed for terms of 3 years, and the member appointed by the governor shall be appointed for a term of 4 years. A member may be re-appointed upon the expiration of his or her term. The members shall elect annually a chairperson from among the members. Members shall be appointed and terms of office shall expire on July 1. Vacancies shall be filled in the same manner for the unexpired term. The secretary of state shall be recording officer and clerk of the commission, but shall have no vote in its decisions.


From the minutes October 6, 2010

Quote:
Ballot Law Commission
(Alternate member appointed by Governor and Council)
Jameson S. French, (r), Portsmouth Effective: October 6, 2010
Succeeding: Gregory T. Martin (d) Keene Term: July 1, 2013


Yes, this may make the issue a bit more interesting


Quote:
665:3 Political Contributions Prohibited. – No ballot law commission member shall make a contribution, as defined in RSA 664:2, to any candidate for office or political committee.


664:2

I. "Election'' means any general biennial or special election, political party primary, or presidential preference primary as provided in RSA 664:1.

IV. "Political party'' or "party'' means any political organization or number of persons which can nominate candidates in any manner prescribed by law and has done so for the current election. The definition of the word "party'' contained in RSA 652:11 shall not apply to this chapter.


V. "Political committee of a political party'' means a state, county, regional, city, ward, or town committee of a political party. A regional committee shall be composed only of members who are residents of towns or cities that form a contiguous land area, and shall have been created and approved by the state committee of the political party. To establish regional committees, a party shall amend its by-laws to authorize them in principle; a copy of the by-law authorization and evidence of the approval for each regional committee by the state committee shall be filed by the political party with the secretary of state before the first Wednesday in June of that year.

VIII. "Contribution'' shall mean a payment, gift, subscription, assessment, contract, payment for services, dues advance, forbearance or loan to a candidate or political committee made for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any candidate. "Contributions'' shall include the use of any thing of value but shall not include the services of volunteers who receive no pay therefor or the use of personal resources by a candidate on behalf of his candidacy.

_________________
- Credimus quod credere volumus -


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:10 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm
Posts: 23560
Welsh Dragon wrote:
I've just been trawling through the NH Executive Council minutes for the last few years and it looks as the recent practice has been for the Governor to appoint a member from one party and an alternate from the other and maybe even alternate them.

In 2010 the member, Stephen Dupray (R) resigned, the alternate, Gregory Martin (D) immediately resigned and was nominated and confirmed as the member. A few months later Jameson French (R) was nominated and confirmed as the new alternate for the remainder of Martin's term i.e until July 2013.

(BTW Gregory Martin resigned as member effective 8/1/11 and doesn't seem to have been replaced yet)

Jameson French's appointment was effective from October 2010 so his 2011 political donations do appear to be rather "iffy".


From KBOA's site. http://www.timothyhorrigan.com/videos/k ... 11125.html

According to NH Rep. Tim Horrigan...

Quote:
BRADFORD E. COOK, r, Manchester
December 1, 2005 to July 1, 2013
(Appointed by Speaker of the House)


ELIZABETH HAGER, r, Concord
September 15, 2010 to July 1, 2013
(Alternate appointed by Speaker of the House)


JANE CLEMONS, d, Nashua
September 14, 2010 to July 1, 2013
(Appointed by Speaker of the House)



MARGARET-ANN MORAN, d, Hillsborough
September 15, 2010 to July 1, 2013
(Alternate appointed by Speaker of the House)


SHEILA ROBERGE, r, Bedford
September 16, 2010 to July 1, 2014
(Appointed by Senate President)



FRANKLIN TORR, r, Dover
January 27, 2004 to July 1, 2010
(Alternate appointed by Senate President)


MARTHA VAN OOT, d, Concord
September 16, 2010 to July 1, 2014
(Appointed by Senate President)



SYLVIO DUPUIS, d, Manchester
December 7, 2005 to July 1, 2007
(Alternate appointed by Senate President)


JAMESON S. FRENCH, r, Portsmouth
October 6, 2010 to July 1, 2013
(Alternate appointed by Governor and Council)



Vacancy
Term to January 21, 2012
(Appointed by Governor and Council)


It is unfortunate that Sylvio Dupuis' term is shown as "December 7, 2005 to July 1, 2007." He is in fact still on the commission's list of alternate members, as is Frank Torr (whose term is shown as "January 27, 2004 to July 1, 2010".)

The start dates are all correct, so anything partisan which these people did before their start dates is not a violation of the ballot commission's regulations. Jane Clemons, for example, did not break the law by having served as a state representative as recently as the 2010 session: she did not file for re-election in June 2010, she resigned on September 13, 2010 and she did not take her seat on the commission until September 14, 2010.


The Governor and Executive Council appoint one regular member and one alternate, with no party restrictions: it would have been legal to appoint Democrats to both seats. Jameson French, notwithstanding his contributions to certain Democratic federal campaigns, is nevertheless a Republican. The other seat was held by a Democrat, Gregory Martin from Keene, who resigned during the summer of 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  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Posts: 9170
Location: Supreme Court of clerks
Occupation: Petite treason procurer
All this talk about Jameson French is making me thirsty:


_________________
Image Image Image Image Image

ASSUME ANYTHING WRITTEN HERE WILL END UP ON TAITZ'S SITE AND FACEBOOK. AND JEROME CORSI WILL POST SCREENSHOTS TO WND. AND WILL BE FILED BY A BIRTHER AS AN EXHIBIT IN FEDERAL COURT. NOW HAVE FUN!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am
Posts: 2530
So far I have found two contributions of potential relevance

Quote:
French, Jameson
Portsmouth, NH 03801
Northland Forest Products/President
HARDWOOD FEDERATION PAC, INC $2,500
primary 03/08/11


To a PAC, located in DC and money has gone to Candidates outside NH it seems.

Quote:
French, Jameson S.
Portsmouth, NH 03801
Northland Forest Products/President HODES, PAUL W (D)
Senate - NH
NEW HAMPSHIRE VICTORY FUND $1,000
general 10/06/10

Made in October 6 2010...

Quote:
Jameson French (Northland Forest Products/CEO), (Zip code: 03801) $500 to MARTIN HEINRICH FOR CONGRESS, INC. on 09/10/10



New Mexico candidate

Quote:
JAMESON S FRENCH (NORTHLAND FOREST PRODUCTS/EXECUTIVE), (Zip code: 03801) $250 to FRIENDS OF JEANNE SHAHEEN on 05/17/10


US senator NH... Now there is a potential problem.

On January 6, 2009, Shaheen was sworn into the United States Senate. So the money was arguably not to influence an election

_________________
- Credimus quod credere volumus -


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Taitz v. Cook (N.H.)
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:05 pm
Posts: 1252
ObjectiveDoubter wrote:
It is so outrageously fascist of this Soviet slime bag Orly to suggest that she can judge your party, not the record and file LEGAL papers with that as evidence. And that is what gets me the most ... she is so happy to be here in America, but she would turn our nation into another gulag if she could, where associations and non-related and totally legal actions are interpreted as evidence by innuendo and trump the law.


orly's only real complaint with the soviet regime was that she wasn't the one in charge ...


_________________
my blog: glad you asked
"i hate to admit it, but i think the obots may be right about what "the courts" are likely to do. it's too easy for them to decide this issue wrongly." :roll: (diogenesLamp, freeper)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 152 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next   

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


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