Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
Posts: 637
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:22 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Dr. Caligari » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:28 pm

Docket Update...





10/23/2012 [link]53,http://www.scribd.com/doc/110924103[/link] REPLY to Response to Motion re 48 Response in Opposition to Motion, 18 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, 47 Response in Opposition to Motion, 50 Attachment, 49 RICO Statement filed by Democrat Party of Mississippi (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A.[highlight]Taitz email refusing to serve MDEC counsel[/highlight], # 2 Exhibit Exhibit B.Federal Express Air Bill Tracking Information #8769 2956 3811)(Begley, Samuel) (Entered: 10/23/2012)


=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10412
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby A Legal Lohengrin » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:30 pm

I intend no disrespect on that kind of process service firm. I have seen such firms effect service of process on people I had thought were buried in a shallow grave somewhere. They can perform miracles. For a price.

User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3040
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Paul Lentz » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:34 pm

OMG. Orly misrepresented a FedEx airbill? See footnote 4. So much for the duty of candor to the court.

But...but...but...WAIT! Isn't the Postmaster General one of the recently-named REEK-O defendants? Despite the fact that FedEX is not affiliated with the USPS (shhh! don't tell Taitz! :-$ ), I think the obvious manipulation of the FedEx airbill and the online delivery tracking info is part of the big conspiracy, and is what Taitz believes to be prima facie evidence of fraud and conspiracy.Taitz didn't misrepresent the FedEx airbill...the Postmaster General manipulated it on orders from the regime. Duh. :lol:

neonzx
Posts: 4413
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby neonzx » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:37 pm

I intend no disrespect on that kind of process service firm. I have seen such firms effect service of process on people I had thought were buried in a shallow grave somewhere. They can perform miracles. For a price.

And Orly knows that too, because she obviously used one to serve OFA after her Flying Monkey failed so miserably with his cab rides in Chicago.





Back to MDP reply, I enjoyed this in the email exhcange of Exhibit A... Mr. Tepper to Taitz:





Please provide us with copies of your filings before the end of the day, and please advise why [highlight=#ffff40]your papers[/highlight] have not, according to PACER, been filed with the court.

Perhaps it was unintentional, but I was =))

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 6998
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby raicha » Tue Oct 23, 2012 8:04 pm

Uh. All of the documents listed in the proof of service attached to the "Notice of Executed Summons" to be filed in Mississippi are, in fact, documents filed in the Indiana case.That may be why the proof of service has the Indiana caption.Hokay.

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6326
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Piffle » Tue Oct 23, 2012 8:23 pm

10/23/2012 [link]53,http://www.scribd.com/doc/110924103[/link] REPLY to Response to Motion re 48 Response in Opposition to Motion, 18 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, 47 Response in Opposition to Motion, 50 Attachment, 49 RICO Statement filed by Democrat Party of Mississippi

:-bd :-bd I think this is my favorite filing so far -- in this or any other Orlylaw case.





While good replies to oppositions are typically fairly short -- limited generally to rebutting new arguments made in the opposition -- B&T had a delicious bonus prop to work with: Orly's incredibly inept and scurrilous REEK-O Statement ("TRS"). And because Orly didn't come close to laying a glove on their original Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, they could safely concentrate on taking the judge on a magical tour of the twin attractions of Reekoville and Sanctions Land! And surely the latter is the brunt of this reply. It is one of the finest roadmaps to sanctions I've ever seen.





At 10 1/2 pages -- with little or no wasted fluff or puffery -- I think it is precisely right-sized for a judge to digest and the interplay of narrative with authoritative footnotes is very well done. It's one of those good pieces of legal writing that deserves revisiting a time or two and I can visualize a judge taking a second pass just to reference the gotcha's and the barbs in the footnotes for inclusion in an opinion.





If the TRS provided a bountiful heap of fresh frivolous fodder, it's also noteworthy (IMO) that the TRS was submittted after Judge Wingate took great pains to explain Section 1927 to Orly at the hearing. Thus, this reply is more than a cloaked motion for sanctions based on the original pleadings; it stresses new incidents and occurences after Taitz was put on notice by Hizzoner Himself. As such, it underscores that mere dismissals and judicial admonitions are insufficient to protect the current and future victims of Taitz's non-stop abuse of judicial processes to smear anyone she pleases.





:-bd :-bd -xx

User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 6705
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Butterfly Bilderberg » Tue Oct 23, 2012 8:50 pm

I see no need for oral argument. The MJOPs can be decided on the papers. However, I would LOVE to attend a hearing and Judge Wingate did indicate that he would schedule this for a hearing as soon as the defendants' reply briefs were filed. Please please please please. Pretty please, Judge! {SMILIES_PATH}/pray.gif

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 3598
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Chilidog » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:08 pm

"Word Salad" = "Pile of Poop."

User avatar
TexasFilly
Posts: 14648
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby TexasFilly » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:10 pm

"Word Salad" = "Pile of Poop."

That was one of the footnotes I referred to as crunchy goodness (not the right side of your equation).Can you imagine the fun the lawyers had punching "word salad" into the Westlaw/Lexis databases? :lol:

obot 10241408971650
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:25 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby obot 10241408971650 » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:45 pm

"anonymous internet posters who havecriticized her or called her names" 8>

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 2138
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Sam the Centipede » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:58 pm

B&T .. could safely concentrate on taking the judge on a magical tour of the twin attractions of Reekoville and Sanctions Land! And surely the latter is the brunt of this reply. It is one of the finest roadmaps to sanctions I've ever seen.

Yes, it's a cracker, a smorgasbord of annihilation with stiletto and broadsword, truly melangerific. I liked how footnote 8 is used - the underlying message of the footnote itself is "let's sanction the witch!" but the reference to it in the body text does not mention sanctions, so Taitz will probably ignore the footnote and not perceive the implied threat/warning. Color her surprised at sanctions time!





Of course, even Taitz might recognize her plight if her patience stretches to reading to the closing sentence where B&T finally confess their intention:


The MDEC respectfully requests, however, that upon dismissal the Court retain jurisdiction in order to consider a motion for monetary sanctions against Taitz pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927.

MDEC is loaded for crow!

Circumspect
Posts: 514
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:47 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Circumspect » Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:21 am

10/23/2012 [link]53,http://www.scribd.com/doc/110924103[/link] REPLY to Response to Motion re 48 Response in Opposition to Motion, 18 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, 47 Response in Opposition to Motion, 50 Attachment, 49 RICO Statement filed by Democrat Party of Mississippi

:-bd :-bd I think this is my favorite filing so far -- in this or any other Orlylaw case.

Its screech factor is off the chart! Orly will be screeching more word salad for days in response to this.

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 18591
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Raleigh, NC\
Contact:

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Foggy » Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:30 am

I think this is my favorite filing so far -- in this or any other Orlylaw case ... I can visualize a judge taking a second pass just to reference the gotcha's and the barbs in the footnotes for inclusion in an opinion.

Oh please, oh please, oh please, Judge Wingate. Read it, and read it again. It's been months since the original MJOP. This one is the real argument now, and it's the bomb.





... it underscores that mere dismissals and judicial admonitions are insufficient to protect the current and future victims of Taitz's non-stop abuse of judicial processes to smear anyone she pleases.

The defense lawyers in Indiana cogently set forth each and every argument as to why Judge Reid had no jurisdiction to hold that "trial" on Monday. The judge ignored them all and went right ahead with the circus performance.





When the §1927 motion is filed in this case, I expect it to be a work of art just like this one, and I seriously doubt that a federal judge is going to simply ignore all the arguments as to why this pestilence needs to be stopped. It's hard for me to be patient, but I see good things coming in this case. Very good things.





Uh. All of the documents listed in the proof of service attached to the "Notice of Executed Summons" to be filed in Mississippi are, in fact, documents filed in the Indiana case.





That may be why the proof of service has the Indiana caption.

Nothing gets by you, does it? ;;)





Memo to self: Nothing gets by raicha. [-X Great catch, raicha.





Bonus: Raicha's catch is just more proof that Sterngard's signature applies without limitation. Here's Orly, trying ever so desperately to drag Nancy Pelosi and President Obama and Obama for America into her Mississippi Mudbucket, so she breaks down after all these years and finally opens her wallet to hire a professional process server on account of it's so important to get it right this time. This one is supposed to count. This one is serious now.





After all these years, she's made a tiny, infinitesimal amount of progress with her legal edumacation, and finally has realized the importance of proper service in a lawsuit if she wants any chance of winning ...





... so she serves papers from the wrong lawsuit on the wrong party, accomplishing nothing whatever except more proof that she's TWLITHOTU. #-o








The reason there's never been a lawyer like her in a Tee Vee show or a movie is, no audience would ever think a "lawyer" could be so stoopit. Venal and insane, sure. Lots of lawyers are venal and insane. But nobody's ever been within a country mile of how stoopit this woman is. There's a limit, when you're asking an audience to suspend disbelief. If you had told me four years ago some of the things she would do, I'd have said, "Nuh uh. Not even possible." [-( =;
Show me, show me, show me how you do that trick! The one that makes me scream, she said.

User avatar
rosy
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:36 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby rosy » Wed Oct 24, 2012 6:51 am

10/23/2012 [link]53,http://www.scribd.com/doc/110924103[/link] REPLY to Response to Motion re 48 Response in Opposition to Motion, 18 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings, 47 Response in Opposition to Motion, 50 Attachment, 49 RICO Statement filed by Democrat Party of Mississippi

That is a thing of utter beauty. No wasted words, just homing in on everything that is wrong with Taitz's law practice craptice in this case, laying it out so plainly that even she should understand it, and serving it up on a silver platter for the delectation of the Judge. With a motion for sanctions on the dessert menu, just waiting to be presented once this main course is done.





My only regret is that Taitz is unlikely to have the understanding or self awareness to really grasp just how good that filing is, and how woefully inadequate she is as a lawyer (and a human being, but that's a separate issue).





And a new word to join mish-mash and word salad as a description of disorganised thinking in a complaint; mélange. :xo

User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 3145
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby MsDaisy » Wed Oct 24, 2012 8:03 am

OMG. Orly misrepresented a FedEx airbill? See footnote 4. So much for the duty of candor to the court.



But...but...but...WAIT! Isn't the Postmaster General one of the recently-named REEK-O defendants? Despite the fact that FedEX is not affiliated with the USPS (shhh! don't tell Taitz! :-$ ), I think the obvious manipulation of the FedEx airbill and the online delivery tracking info is part of the big conspiracy, and is what Taitz believes to be prima facie evidence of fraud and conspiracy.





Taitz didn't misrepresent the FedEx airbill...the Postmaster General manipulated it on orders from the regime. Duh. :lol:

Yea cuz the Postmaster haz computer generated date stamps that he fraudulates documents and stuffs wif. Even FedEx stuffs!





As for the Legal Masters of Birfology and ass kicking, Mr Begley and Mr Tepper......





YOU GO BOYS!





=D> =D> =D> =D> =D>


:wenotworthy:


:rockon:


-xx

User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 8992
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Plutodog » Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:26 am

My only regret is that Taitz is unlikely to have the understanding or self awareness to really grasp just how good that filing is, and how woefully inadequate she is as a lawyer (and a human being, but that's a separate issue).

No, I don't think it's separate in Taitz's case. :-k
We are not sinners. We are not abominations. We were not born broken, and we do not need salvation. We have embraced our right to think beyond the boundaries of religion. We are living and loving our lives free from faith. -- Sarah Morehead

User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8406
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby verbalobe » Wed Oct 24, 2012 11:23 am

Something I enjoyed in this Response: at a few points, interweaving the quoted language directly from the cited decision with the argument itself. It could not have been made more clear (particularly where asserting legal frivolity) that settled law precludes Orly's 'arguments' [sic], than by so seamlessly using the words of the opinions themselves.





As such, dismissal of Taitz’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief is proper because she “would not be entitled to relief under any set of facts or any possible theory that [she] could prove consistent with the complaint’s allegations.” Bank of Abbeville & Trust Co...

In other words, Taitz “fails to support her contention with any legal argument. She does not cite any [applicable] law supporting … such a claim, nor does she cite any analogous law from another jurisdiction. Because plaintiff fails to make any legal argument in support of any claim, her claims are waived.” Kirksey v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Inc....

I can just see Orly complaining that this represents lazy cut-and-paste by defense counsel1 -- and completely missing that they doubly reinforce their point by doing so. =D>





[edit]1Especially when they have criticized her for copy-pasting her word salads.[/edit]

User avatar
realist
Posts: 30871
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby realist » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:29 pm

Docket Update...





Document Number: [link]54,http://www.scribd.com/doc/111018592[/link]


Docket Text: NOTICE of Executed Summons, filed by Orly Taitz. (Attachments: # (1) Affidavit of Process Server)(ND)





link shortly

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 31421
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby Sterngard Friegen » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:35 pm

:shock:

MaineSkeptic
Posts: 5295
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 2:48 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby MaineSkeptic » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:44 pm

This document could not be processed at this time. There was an error during conversion. Please check back later.

Hmmpf!

Same here! Double hmmpf!

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 10614
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby kate520 » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:45 pm

Harrumph ?

User avatar
realist
Posts: 30871
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby realist » Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:51 pm

I can see it on Scribd but can not open it... Scribd has been having fits and has been on and offline all day, so...Perhaps try again later is all I can say. :(

User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 9247
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Mississippi Ballot Challenge (ACT I & I.5) :)

Postby esseff44 » Wed Oct 24, 2012 1:03 pm

All those defendants and everyone around them must be using up their WTF quotas for the month.


Return to “State Ballot Challenges”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests