That's right, today is the deadline for his Opening Brief; then next Friday is the Respondents' Brief, then the 30th is the telephonic hearing.

We'll be on the lookout for a copy of today's brief.

Apuzzo posted the opening brief in the appeal. It is 158 pages. http://www.scribd.com/puzo1/d/94493192- ... ed-5-18-12.

WHAT?!?! Brief it ain't! Isn't there a page limit or something to those things?

The "brief" itself is a mere 60 pages.

It is 60 pages of new nonsense plus 100 pages of exhibits including illegible pages from Obama's high school yearbook.

Also available at Jack's...

2012-05-18 - Purpura|Moran v Obama (Appeal) - Appellants' Opening Brief & Appendix

I read the first page and a half of his argument and I already spotted 3 logical fallacies.

And is he allowed to basically re-argue his entire case again on an appeal?

Apuzzo's brief is a word salad. (What else is new?) His closing section on Wong Kim Ark is pretty laughable. The only thing of significance is Apuzzo's assertions that "natural born Citizen" has a secret meaning -- one that apparently only Mario can divine and only after 40 pages of obscure and laughable judicial "scholarship." Too bad he never read or understood the dissent in Wong. That blows all of his arguments to bits.

Apuzzo is a buffoon. A very long winded buffoon.

He included the Breitbart bio in his legal brief as a "fact" ...but "not in evidence" ...."just look - here's more hearsay garbage that adds to Apuzzo's concept that "Totality" defeats "Veracity".
And this was filed AFTER the author of that bio declared it is erroneous. And he submits Cold Case Posse crap again "not in evidence...just to add to Totality". Gotta be a violation of standards of evidence in that the ALJ already declared that to be "internet rumors, suspicions, political propaganda" and is therefore inadmissible.

And sadly, Putz persists with pushing the failed argument that natural born requires 2 US citizen parents, even though that has been shot down by so many rulings it is a void.

Please - defense counsel - take the time to educate the court - show that this "appeal" is nothing but a continuation of plaintiff's pattern of behavior to be a paper terrorist, show that he and his attorney are vex litigants. Request the court Strunk these shitheads within an inch of pudgy Purple's last dollar. They are literally asking for it.

The Arizona SoS could post the verification info he got from Hawaii DoH and publicly announce that Barack Obama is a US natural born citizen....but these racists would still not accept it.
Strunk them.

Plus the Blurb on the leaflet was an information leaflet for a book that flatly said that Barack obama jr was born in Hawaii, and was published after the leaflet. So how this is evidence is beyond me.

Yeah yeah an argument for the other thread...

Yeah, what was that about? Mario makes my head hurt.

Mario cited 34 cases including Scott v Sandford but he conveniently forgot to cite the following cases:

Kerchner v Obama
Tisdale v Obama
Allen v Obama
Hollander v McCain
Farrar v Obama (GA Ballot Challenge)
Swihart v Obama (Indiana Election Commission hearing)
Strunk v New York State Board of Elections

and many more.

Surprisingly, that's within the 65 page limit. Perhaps filing in a court where he also has to do paying business has limited his insanity to some extent.

Citing the Dred Scott decision as a precedent for his argument (footnote 9) suggests one thing: Apuzzo would really, really like to return to those good old days when Blacks "knew their place" and would not dare to run for office. In fact, they would get out of his way as he walked down the sidewalk, stepping into the street and doffing their caps.

And asking them for their papers.

It always amazes me when folks who were the subject of enormous hatred when they came to America (like Apuzzo's ancestors undoubtedly were) act like Apuzzo. In fact, growing up, I heard quite a few slurs against the "Eye-talians". They are unrepeatable.

It's part of the "I have mine, now bugger off," syndrome.

What Stern said, but I also think it has to do with blacks being a group that even the most looked-down-upon ethnic group could hold themselves out as superior to.

I grew up in the segregated Deep South, but I was taught that you should treat every one, rich or poor, black or white, with the respect they were due as a human being, and that to do so was a sign of "good breeding." "Class is as class does," I was told, and high-class people didn't need to put down another group so they could feel superior.

Libertarians?

That's the official motto of the GOP.

Also known as the conservative mantra along with "Don't rock the boat".

ORYR is reporting that Wednesday's hearing will be in person (not telephonic).

Perhaps the Judges would like to grill Mario in person on his somewhat novel interpretations of Minor and other 'precedent'... Do I smell sanctions? Another frivolous mention?

Mario has it on his blog. In Trenton, before Fisher, Baxter and Carchman.



I guess these judges wanted to experience the crazy in person.

Just a reminder...





They are number 6 of 10 arguments to be heard and number 1 of 5 scheduled for oral argument on the afternoon of the 30th.