(REMOVED TO) WESTERN DIST. TN - LLF, et al. v NDP, et al. - ACT I & ACT II

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2238

I guess Dummett doesn't agree with Venn Aryan that moving his case to federal court is a good thing:

Dummett (that's du-may) wrote:

The bad news is the State of Tennessee knew their goose was cooked so they moved the case to federal court. This means they can drag the case out until the case is moot.

If he thinks that dragging this case out is a bad thing then he should converse with his attorney because I don't think that Venn Aryan would agree.

https://www.facebook.com/jdummett1/posts/3468886008844

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:41 am

Du-may ain't very smar-tay.

bob · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:51 am

Dummett (on Teh Facebook) wrote:

A representative from New Hampshire contacted me today to tell me that he has two democrats and two republicans in the New Hampshire legislation who are willing to do their constitutional duty and along with me as a Presidential candidate use the strategy I came up with to keep Obama off the ballot. This means I will be marshaling my attorneys and legal folks to New Hampshire to join in an effort to enforce the US Constitution at the State level. ... I have a bipartisan coalition of legally elected State Representatives who want me to be the lead Presidential candidate plaintiff to force the State of New Hampshire to abide by the Constitution of the United States. ... I have come up with a strategy that will expose Barrack Obama for what he is and is not. However I can't implement this on my own.

The details of this strateregy are not revealed.

Over/under on defendant's motion to transfer to Arizona (for consolidation)?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:53 am

mimi · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 9:19 am

Can somebody help a girl out?

Van Irion originally sued the "National Democratic Party", of which nobody knows what that organization is. He also included Wasserman-Schultz and Forrester. But, even though he named Wasserman-Schultz and Forrester, he never bothered to serve them.

Later, he read the Fogbow, or one of his peeps read the Fogbow, and he learned of his mistake. He learned that he named the wrong Defendant on his lawsuit. Or else he named the wrong Defendant on purpose to avoid having his case get booted to Federal Court. We just don't know.

Then, he amends his complaint and changes "the National Democratic Party" for "The Democratic National Committee" and "the Tennessee Democratic Party". And he finally got around to actually serving Wasserman-Schultz and Forrester.

So, was it that he finally named The National Democratic Party that booted this thing to Federal Court?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:23 am

I think Irion sued an entity that he knew didn't exist, or that existed and was controlled by someone he knew, or at least knew wouldn't defend. And I think he got caught. The real representatives of the real Democratic Party have stepped in to put a stop to it. And, spoiled in his fraudulent scheme, Irion has now had to serve the real defendants.

This seems discipline-worthy misconduct to me.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

Why does Dummett

need a plan for NH or anywhere else?

He announced a short while ago that Shurf Joe had briefed him on the findings of the "cold case posse" and that that it would be the end for Obama... checkmate. any. day. now. frogmarching and all that. That happens tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. EST.

So wassup with this NH crap? Just more grifting, of course. I think that's all he and Van Aryan are good at planning. So far it's working well. As long as there are stupid birthers around willing to believe their crap, it will continue to work.

MrBrown · **Joined:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:21 pm **Posts:** 411

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

I think Irion sued an entity that he knew didn't exist, or that existed and was controlled by someone he knew, or at least knew wouldn't defend. And I think he got caught. The real representatives of the real Democratic Party have stepped in to put a stop to it. And, spoiled in his fraudulent scheme, Irion has now had to serve the real defendants.

This seems discipline-worthy misconduct to me.

I am perplexed at why these critters are so ham handed and outright stupid-sneaky. If they actually believe that this game of suing their own fake front 'party' would NOT be outted, or that simply reciting their same exact litany of nonsense in each and every suit has a molecule of a possibility to succeed.....they are delusional.
Dummey sure does the solicitifying to the faithful dolts who fawn all over his brave crusade on his Facebook page. Its nauseating to see such shallow hatefilled suckers get excited by what will amount to absolutely nothing. May they ache from broken hearts and erode their cheeks with tears as their crusade meets nothing but failure, may they each go broke from donating to the grifters.

However it needs to get done, the DNC or whomever has to demand an investigation, and demand that Van Irion has his license to practise law revoked and that he and his co-conspirators be [size=200]$[/size]panked Severely for this attempted fraud.
Astounding. These creeps must be watched closely....It is good their dishonest gimmick was sniffed out before these cruds were able to put on their fake song and dance.

obot 1024 · **Joined:** Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:25 pm **Posts:** 661

I think DUMAY plans to submit the Shruff's report to NH.

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2238

FWIW, I don't think Dummet

is in on the grift. I think he's a genuine moron who thinks he is suing the Democratic Party and that he will succeed in getting Obama off the ballot.

MrBrown · **Joined:** Sat Feb 25, 2012 1:21 pm **Posts:** 411

realist wrote:

Why does Dummett need a plan for NH or anywhere else?

He announced a short while ago that Shurf Joe had briefed him on the findings of the "cold case posse" and that that it would be the end for Obama... checkmate. any. day. now. frogmarching and all that. That happens tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. EST.

So wassup with this NH crap? Just more grifting, of course. I think that's all he and Van Aryan are good at planning. So far it's working well. As long as there are stupid birthers around willing to believe their crap,it will continue to work grifters will be playing them for sucker..

I am familiar with some NH Democrats, and I know a couple Reps. serving in the NH House. Dummey's claim that there are 2 Democrats now in the NH House, or 2 people who are still active in the Democratic party, willing to go on record contesting Obama's eligibility, or that there are 2 Democrats in the House who are closet birthers, is extremely unlikely.
As in a complete LIE.
Isn't there any agency that has regulatory authority over solicitations by grifters who make false claims and false promises to scam stupid suckers out of their money ?

esseff44 · **Posted:** Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:01 pm

MrBrown wrote:

realist wrote:

Isn't there any agency that has regulatory authority over solicitations by grifters who make false claims and false promises to scam stupid suckers out of their money ?

First it takes a defrauded party who is aware of the fraud and is willing to make a complaint to the appropriate agency. For birfers, they may be just too much to ask.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

FILING UPDATES:

Motion to Dismiss 12(b)(1) 12(b)(6)

Memorandum in Support of MtD 12(b)(1) & 12(b)(6)

Motion to Dismiss 12(b)(2)

Memorandum in Support of MtD 12(b)(2)

Motion to Dismiss 12(b)(3) or Transfer Venue

Memorandum in Support of MtD 12(b)(3) or Transfer Venue

Exhibit A to Memorandum in Support of MtD 12(b)(3) or Transfer Venue

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:12 pm

The motion papers are good, not great. Citing Justice v. Fuddy for the proposition that the birthers don't have standing and missing Tisdale v. Obama as precedent for President Obama's eligibility (citing only Ankeny) are sloppy things. But the motion and allied papers are good enough.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

New Docket Entries...

Quote:

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA, Inc. et al
Assigned to: Judge S. Thomas Anderson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 02/23/2012
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 370 Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

03/07/2012 10 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for VAN RENCELLIERE IRION by Liberty Legal Foundation. receipt #M4676006505 (proposed order submitted) (Attachments: # 1 certificate of good standing)(agj) (Entered: 03/08/2012)

03/08/2012 11 ORDER granting 10 Motion of Van R. Irion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 3/8/12. (Anderson, S.) (Entered: 03/08/2012)

Apparently Mr. Super-Duper Constitutional Attorney's first foray into federal court in his own jurisdiction.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

Docket to date...

Quote:

U.S. District Court
Western District of Tennessee (Memphis)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:12-cv-02143-STA-cgc

Liberty Legal Foundation et al v. National Democratic Party of the USA, Inc. et al
Assigned to: Judge S. Thomas Anderson
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 02/23/2012
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 370 Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

02/23/2012 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Chip Forrester from Shelby County Chancery Court, case number CH-11-1757-3 (Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0651-1434549), filed by Chip Forrester. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit A-D)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 02/23/2012)

02/24/2012 2 Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton added. Consent forms mailed to counsel. (ac) (Entered: 02/24/2012)

03/01/2012 3 Judge S. Thomas Anderson assigned as presiding judge and Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton assigned as referral judge. (jae) (wjn). (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 4 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule (12)(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) by Democratic National Committee, Chip Forrester, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Tennessee Democratic Party. (Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 5 MEMORANDUM in Support re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule (12)(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) filed by Democratic National Committee, Chip Forrester, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Tennessee Democratic Party. (Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 6 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) by Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 7 MEMORANDUM in Support re 6 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) filed by Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. (Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 8 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) by Chip Forrester. (Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/01/2012 9 MEMORANDUM in Support re 8 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) filed by Chip Forrester. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Declaration of Chip Forrester)(Stranch, J.) (Entered: 03/01/2012)

03/07/2012 10 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice for VAN RENCELLIERE IRION by Liberty Legal Foundation. receipt #M4676006505 (proposed order submitted) (Attachments: # 1 certificate of good standing)(agj) (Entered: 03/08/2012)

03/08/2012 11 ORDER granting 10 Motion of Van R. Irion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 3/8/12. (Anderson, S.) (Entered: 03/08/2012)

mimi · **Posted:** Fri Mar 09, 2012 11:07 am

If this is in Tennessee, why did he have to get pro hac vice? He's licensed in Tennessee.

I am confused. :-?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Fri Mar 09, 2012 11:21 am

Is Irion admitted in Federal court in Tennessee?

esseff44 · **Posted:** Fri Mar 09, 2012 11:39 am

Here's some background on the magistrate judge who has been assigned:

http://tri-statedefenderonline.com/arti ... essee.html

[-o<

for sanctions .

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

Is Irion admitted in Federal court in Tennessee?

"Apparently" not or he would not be applying for phv.

That's why I stated it must be his first foray into the federal court, though in his phv application it's stated that he's admitted to the EDTN.

He also appears to be continuing his lack of candor with the courts. He mentions that he was admitted phv in the Administrative Court for the hearing before ALJ Malihi but... uhhhh... "forgets?" to mention he was denied phv before the Fulton County Superior Court... convenient yes/no?

I also see no mention of a sponsoring attorney (though Hatfield most likely would?) and no indication that he submitted his ap to the GA bar as IIRC is required, etc.

mimi · **Posted:** Fri Mar 09, 2012 12:59 pm

thank you.

bob · **Posted:** Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:33 pm

realist wrote:

Sterngard Friegen wrote:

Is Irion admitted in Federal court in Tennessee?

"Apparently" not or he would not be applying for phv.

That's why I stated it must be his first foray into the federal court, though in his phv application it's stated that he's admitted to the EDTN.

IIRC, Irion's "Confederate clothing" case (wherein he represented students disciplined for wearing to school clothes displaying the Confederate flag) was in the E.D. Tn.

It would appear Irion doesn't want to apply for W.D. Tn. bar membership (which should be no problem for a Tn.-barred attorney).

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:21 am

Looks as if Venn Aryan is trying to get this back into State court and/or delay while the paypal button is clicking:

Quote:

12 Filed & Entered: 03/14/2012 Motion to Remand to State Court
13 Filed & Entered: 03/14/2012 Motion to Remand to State Court
14 Filed & Entered: 03/14/2012 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply
15 Filed & Entered: 03/14/2012 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23931

Quote:

03/14/2012 12 MOTION to Remand to State Court Proposed Order Submitted by All Plaintiffs. (Irion, Van) (Entered: 03/14/2012)

03/14/2012 13 MOTION to Remand to State Court Memo of Law in Support by All Plaintiffs. (Irion, Van) (Entered: 03/14/2012)

03/14/2012 14 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 6 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2), 8 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3), 4 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule (12)(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) Proposed Order Submitted by All Plaintiffs. (Irion, Van) (Entered: 03/14/2012)

03/14/2012 15 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 6 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2), 8 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3), 4 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule (12)(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) Memorandum in Support by All Plaintiffs. (Irion, Van) (Entered: 03/14/2012)

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:35 am

Irion is a really bad lawyer. In arguing that resort to Federal law is not necessary to determine President Obama's eligibility (and, thus, the case should be remanded to state court), Irion makes the following incomprehensible argument:

Quote:

Specifically, Plaintiffs‟ complaint alleges that Mr. Obama is not a citizen because he voluntarily relinquished his U.S. citizenship as an adult. Compl. ¶¶17-19. Plaintiffs‟ complaint also alleges that Mr. Obama is not who he says he is and that the Defendants cannot confirm Mr. Obama‟s true identity. Under either of these theories, if proven, the Defendants would be guilty of negligent misrepresentation when they certify to the Tennessee Secretary of State that Mr. Obama is qualified to serve as President. Neither of these theories require an interpretation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution because certifying that a non-citizen or an individual whose identity is completely unknown is qualified to be President would plainly amount to negligence, at a minimum.

Voluntary relinquishment of U.,S. citizenship would be decided by Federal law, not Tennessee law. Whether President Obama is thus still a natural born Citizen is only an issue of Federal law. Who does Irion think he is fooling with these nonsense arguments?

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

(REMOVED TO) WESTERN DIST. TN - LLF, et al. v NDP, et al. - ACT I & ACT II

Who is online