Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#276

Post by Notorial Dissent » Wed Jul 06, 2016 6:50 pm

BillTheCat wrote:So, he lied about going rogue and releasing the list, which would have allegedly been relevant to the contenders in the Presidential race.

I'd venture to say, there isn't a name on that "list" that has anything to do with the race at all, and he's a fucking liar. My bad, I should have known. :blackeye:
Or a rat's ass about to begin with, and as I understand it he shouldn't even have those records at all. He was ordered to surrender them to the new attorney.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#277

Post by bob » Mon Jul 25, 2016 4:55 pm

Sibley's blog: A New Social Network:
For the past few weeks I have been working on a project that diverges significantly from my prior efforts. That project is a new type of Social Network platform found at Alt19.co (not ".com").

[ * * * ]

Notably, Twitter, Facebook and Reddit among others have all decided they have the "right" to determine what can be said and what cannot be according to their "moral" code.

I believe just the opposite. That a free society can only grow as a result of enduring the "free speech" of idiots, trolls and the like as the alternative is an enforced-from-above idealogy that can only trend towards tyranny of thought, word and then deed.

That is why Alt19.co is a private, uncensored social network. Say what you like. Our "Privacy Policy" is that we have no "Privacy Policy". The site will be unmoderated and a post will not be removed because it offends someone. If you don't like what you are reading, leave.
:yankyank:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#278

Post by Piffle » Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:47 pm

bob wrote:Sibley's blog: A New Social Network:
... I believe just the opposite. That a free society can only grow as a result of enduring the "free speech" of idiots, trolls and the like...
Ya can't say the guy don't walk the walk.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#279

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Jul 26, 2016 5:26 am

So am I to take it from this that Mad Monty got shut down on one or more/all of the social networks for being an obnoxious Krank??? So he's going to establish Krank NetTM for the truly obnoxious??? And he's going to support this how? Already sounds like loads of fun. At least it'll give him soemthign to do since he really can't practice law any more.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 12438
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#280

Post by Dolly » Mon Sep 05, 2016 7:57 pm

Post: #798969 bob
Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:55 pm
bob wrote:Sibley's blog: A New Social Network:
For the past few weeks I have been working on a project that diverges significantly from my prior efforts. That project is a new type of Social Network platform found at Alt19.co (not ".com").

[ * * * ]

Notably, Twitter, Facebook and Reddit among others have all decided they have the "right" to determine what can be said and what cannot be according to their "moral" code.

I believe just the opposite. That a free society can only grow as a result of enduring the "free speech" of idiots, trolls and the like as the alternative is an enforced-from-above idealogy that can only trend towards tyranny of thought, word and then deed.

That is why Alt19.co is a private, uncensored social network. Say what you like. Our "Privacy Policy" is that we have no "Privacy Policy". The site will be unmoderated and a post will not be removed because it offends someone. If you don't like what you are reading, leave.
:yankyank:
at his new social media site, https://alt19.co/
there is ONE guy (Pieter Jansegers - jansegers) that has a bunch of posts about WORDS, verbs, spelling, language, that kind of stuff :roll:

Scroll down. I don't know how to link to a specific comment.
Blair Sibley Aug 22, 2016 (Updated Aug 22, 2016) in Welcome Space STICKED PUBLIC

Friends, it pains me to have to make this post, but I'm afraid we have not reached sufficient critical mass to justify the continuation of this site. It currently costs around $200 a month to keep it up. With the number of users we have, ads alone would not be enough to cover this cost. Additionally, my personal life has become incredibly turbulent in the past few weeks (which is why I haven't been able to put the proper attention and care into the site that I would've liked to). Unless something incredible happens in the next week (e.g. someone takes over the site/we get funding from somewhere else/it goes viral somehow), all of which is incredibly unlikely, I'm afraid this is the end of the road for Alt19.

I encourage you to continue posting and spreading the word about Donald Trump and the issues that matter to all of us. I have recently learned of a platform called Gab, which has taken the same initiative we have, with a slightly bigger crew (and more media attention). If you are looking for an alternative platform to social media giants like Twitter and Facebook, Gab looks like a solid place to start.

Thank you all so much for making this place such a vibrant and exciting community. I hope you all have enjoyed your time here at Alt19, and I am truly sorry that I was unable to take this as far as I wanted--and I know we all wanted--it to go.

Unless something significant changes, we are scheduled to take the site down on August 26th, 2016.
- Blair
Like (3)
Show all 5 comments.
I figure less than 300 members. About 12 pages that show a list of 25 members a page.


Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
Posts: 1043
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#281

Post by Dr. Caligari » Mon Sep 05, 2016 7:59 pm

Additionally, my personal life has become incredibly turbulent in the past few weeks
Anyone know what he is alluding to?


J.D., Miskatonic University School of Law

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 12438
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#282

Post by Dolly » Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:08 pm

Dr. Caligari wrote:
Additionally, my personal life has become incredibly turbulent in the past few weeks
Anyone know what he is alluding to?
There was nothing on his blog. The last post was JULY 21, 2016 about his new social media site.
http://amoprobos.blogspot.com/


Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#283

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:17 pm

You mean Krank.net couldn't attract a following, I'm shocked I tell you shocked. :shock: :rotflmao: :rotflmao: Now he's a multi-field failure.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#284

Post by bob » Mon Feb 13, 2017 1:49 pm

Sibley's blog: Could the 9th Circuit “Travel Ban Case” Judges Be Removed from the Bench?:
Which brings me back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judges William Canby, Richard Clifton and Michelle Friedland and the now-pertinent question: “Can these judges be removed from their judicial offices?” I believe they could – and should – be removed and here is why:

* * *

Here, the statutory provision President Trump cited as the legal basis for his order – 8 U.S. Code §1182 – requires the President to give a reason for suspending visas. Such reasons can include anything from individuals having spreadable diseases to them posing a risk to the American public's safety.

However, in their Travel Ban Order, Judges Canby, Clifton and Friedland ignored 8 U.S. Code §1182 as apparently inconvenient to their politically-motivated decision. This ignoring of their "judicial duty" to decide on the “operation of each” – here 8 U.S. Code § 1182 and their claimed First and Fifth Amendment concerns – breaches their Marbury duty.

Thus, I argue that Judges Canby, Clifton and Friedland have “misbehaved” and thus are subject to an action to forfeit their judicial offices. Otherwise, judges can usurp power not delegated to them and act like an unelected, super-legislature and decide cases and create law without any reference to conflicting and settled principles of law and statutes.

This is, of course, the very definition of tyranny. But that is just my opinion.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#285

Post by bob » Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:19 pm

When credit is due: Sibley defends Planned Parenthood (because he claims his relatives helped create and support it).


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#286

Post by bob » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:30 pm

Sibley awakens, and writes at his blog:
Fort Sumter to Charlottesville: A letter from two Montgomery Blairs to two Presidents
:
A month before the surrender of Fort Sumter, President Lincoln, on March 14, 1861, asked each of the members of his Cabinet their opinions on whether to provision or abandon Fort Sumter. His Post Master General -- and my great, great, grandfather -- Montgomery Blair responded the next day by letter.

[Executive summary: Sibley the Elder recommended providing provisions, as a show of the federal government's resolve.]

The correlation of the “rebels” of South Carolina with the “antifa” movement of today makes Montgomery Blair’s March 1861 letter as relevant and prescient today as it was 150+ years ago. Antifa has “availed themselves of the disappointment attendant upon defeat in the late presidential election” to justify their violent action against those they deem in opposition to their agenda. As in 1861, “nothing has been done to check [antifa’s] progress or prevent its being regarded either at home or abroad as a successful revolution.”

Then, as now, the question is “How is [the establishment of federal authority] to be carried into effect? That it is by measures which will inspire respect for the power of the Government, and the firmness of those who administer it, does not admit of debate.” In 1861, the necessary “measures” were the provisioning of Fort Sumter so it could resist any attempt to remove it from federal control. In 2017, the virtual Fort Sumter at issue is the ability of Citizens to exercise their First Amendment right to “petition” peacefully without the threat of violence by antifa.

Hence, were Montgomery Blair writing President Trump today, I believe he would recommend measures against antifa-like violence from whatever part of the political spectrum it emanates that would “inspire respect for the power of the Government” to maintain the cornerstone right to peacefully assemble to petition. This being done regardless of the odiousness to the sensibilities of the public at large of the substance of the “petition” being made.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#287

Post by bob » Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:18 am

Sibley was on WOBC. :yawn:

Bonus P&E comment:
jeffrey Harrison wrote:Back in June 2017 as a junior volunteer of Where’s Obama Birth Certificate I assisted Mr. Sibley with a project in contacting Judge Fredric J. Ammerman of Clearfield County, PA to request him to appoint a Grand Jury dealing with Obama’s fraudulently submitted identity documents. ( my first letter was sent 06/02/17)

Mr. Sibley claimed Obama violated 18 PA Code 4101 (Forgery), 18 PA code 4104 (Tampering with Records or Identification), 18 PA Code 4111 (Tampering with Public Records) and/or 18 PA Code 4120 (Identity Theft) among others. This info was included in the first sent letter.

Also included in this mailing was a 31 page analysis entitled: A Request and Presentment Concerning Barack Hussein Obama’s Identity Documents. Information and evidence in this report dealt with Savanah Guthrie “felt the seal?”, lack of raised seal, “white Halo”, misaligned type, different fonts, kerning, errors in Registrar’s Stamp, and etc. Also note was problems with Obama’s SSN and Selective Service Number.

June 9, 2015 Clearfield County Court Administrator responded with Code, Title 42 Pa. C.S.A …”Grand Jury convened to investigate crime in county where a crime occurs…” …”tampering with records didn’t occur in this county, …Grand Jury won’t occur”.

June 11, 2015 With Mr. Sibley’s assistance I sent a second letter stating three cases and references of crimes occurring from outside jurisdictions outside PA that went into PA and were ruled on favorable. July 16, 2015 I received a letter from Clearfield County Court “warning” not to contact
again”. So I quit while I was a-head…


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#288

Post by bob » Thu Dec 14, 2017 5:26 pm

Sibley's blog: EVIDENCE OF CIA ROLE IN FORGING OBAMA’S BIRTH CERTIFICATE:
Government computers illegally hacked Hawaii Dept. of Health

Regardless of what you think of Alex Jones, he recently posted an article that the main stream media will not touch regarding the CIA's involvement in the creation of Barack Obama's birth certificate.

Ignore the article and issue if you want, but as a U.S. Citizen I opine you have the obligation to know what the government is doing sure in the belief that we are all NetFlix-addicted morons.
:yawn:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#289

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:01 pm

:yankyank:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#290

Post by bob » Thu Jul 05, 2018 6:53 pm

Sibley awakens!:
Mr. President, Robert Mueller is operating without Constitutional Authority
:
I recently wrote a letter to the President as I believe that Mr. Mueller is acting without Constitutional Authority and hence all his actions are void.
I write to assert that based upon the recent holding by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 21, 2018, in deciding the case of Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, Docket No.: 17-130, there is no doubt that the appointment of Robert Mueller by Acting Attorney General Rosenstein was both Constitutionally and statutorily a void act. As a result, all actions taken by Mr. Mueller are void ab initio. Let me explain:

[Sibley's :yankyank: snipped.]

In sum:
•If Mr. Rosenstein is otherwise qualified to Act as the Attorney General under 5 U.S.C. Section 3345(a)(1), his term of office would expire 210 days from when he began Acting as the Attorney General, to wit, December 17, 2017;
•The office Mr. Mueller purports to currently hold is not established by Congress as required by the Appointments Clause;
•The power Mr. Mueller is exercising is equal to or greater than a United States Attorney;
•United States Attorneys are principal officers requiring Senate confirmation under 28 U.S.C. Section 541;
•Returning to Lucia, the Supreme Court has held that “one who makes a timely challenge to the constitutional validity of the appointment of an officer who adjudicates his case” is entitled to relief. Ryder v. United States, 515 U. S. 177, 182-183 (1995). . . . This Court has also held that the "appropriate" remedy for an adjudication tainted with an appointments violation is a new "hearing before a properly appointed" official. Id., at 183, 188 as all proceedings by a Constitutionally-invalid officer are void.

Therefore, Mr. Mueller is acting in violation of the Appointments Clause and his actions are thus void ab initio.

I am available to address any questions, comments or concerns you may have.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#291

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Jul 05, 2018 7:38 pm

Sibley's grasp of reality, non-existent AS EVER.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15921
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#292

Post by Suranis » Thu Jul 05, 2018 8:31 pm

I am available to address any questions, comments or concerns you may have
I bet he is.



Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#293

Post by bob » Mon Jul 30, 2018 3:53 pm

Sibley wrote:I am available to address any questions, comments or concerns you may have
Sibley will be on tonight's episode of WOBC.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#294

Post by bob » Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:58 pm

Sibley's blog: The National Labor Relations Board, CarMax and Me:
Under the President Obama-controlled National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), a rule was promulgated in 2014 know as the Purple Communications rule. That rule said that Employees who have been given access to their Employer’s email system for work-related purposes have a presumptive right to use that system for Section 7–protected communications on nonworking time. Enacted in 1935, Section 7 refers to the National Labor Relations Act, §7 which guarantees Employees the right to engage in “concerted activities for the purpose of . . . other mutual aid or protection".

It was under that Purple Communications rule that I, on May 1, 2016, when employed at CarMax, sent out seven thousand, five hundred (7,500) emails to CarMax Sales Associates[*] spread out over 159 stores in 38 states. The email raised wage and working conditions concerns and produced a remarkable response to a Google Forms questionnaire. Of course, CarMax fired me five days later on May 6, 2016. My firing is a story for another day.

Why all this is relevant now is this: Under the President Trump-controlled NLRB, a case has arisen which the Republicans on the NLRB are using to repeal the Purple Communications rule. This would allow Employers to block use of company email systems for Employee communications regarding union or other protected concerted activity.

Graciously, the NLRB has requested Amicus briefs on whether to repeal the Purple Communications rule. As I, due to my unique experience at CarMax, have a singular perspective on the inestimable value of maintaining the Purple Communications rule, I have told my CarMax story in my Amicus brief. Through the Exhibits to the Brief are long, the Brief itself is short and makes for an illustrative story of the corrosive power of soulless corporations using Employee-controlling technology to maintain their unfair hegemony which renders the 1935 NLRA virtually meaningless today. Caveat Operarius!
Sibley's amicus brief to the NLRB. Executive summary: Montgomery roused some rabble, got canned, filed a NLRB complaint, and was awarded a whopping $538 in back pay.

I wonder if Sibley appreciates the irony of him appealing to a "Obama-controlled" NLRB rule designed to protect workers. That the MAGA president wants to repeal.


* What's the deal with birthers and used-car salespeople? :think:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 7067
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#295

Post by Northland10 » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:24 pm

If the purple communication covered his emails, why did he not file a complaint? I have a hunch he Sibleyed any complaint and made it impossible for him to succeed. If you are going to make a major move toward a group communication, it would be wise to have all your ducks in a row and a strong work record with the company.

When I was a non-tenured teacher, our local submitted a grievance on my behalf and without my knowledge, as that was the only way to ensure I was protected. By law and the contract, I was entitled to file a grievance, but reality said don't do it until you are tenured and safer from retaliation.

Oh, and they succeeded. I actually did not realize they had even done that until one of the union officers (i.e. a fellow teacher) told me about it but suggested I don't mention it to anybody else besides my mentor, the band director.


North-land: of the family 10
UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#296

Post by bob » Thu Sep 06, 2018 4:53 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Jul 05, 2018 7:38 pm
Sibley's grasp of reality, non-existent AS EVER.
:fingerwag: :
Sibley's blog:
I am not alone in arguing Robert Muller is operating extra-Constitutionally
:
In a recent post, I published a letter to President Trump arguing that Robert Muller is acting without Constitutional authority and hence all his actions are void. I am not alone in making this argument but am joined[*] by respected legal authorities Steven Calabresi, one of the founders of the Federalist Society and a law professor at Northwestern and Douglas Kmiec, who teaches constitutional law at Pepperdine University[.]
:mememe:

* A WND article; nb.:
WND wrote:Last month, Judge Dabney Friedrich, who serves at the trial-court level in D.C. federal court, ruled against dismissal on Constitutional grounds in Mueller’s case against Concord Management and Consulting, alleged Russian social-media propagandists.

“The appointment does not violate core separation-of-powers principles,” Friedrich wrote. “Nor has the Special Counsel exceeded his authority under the appointment order by investigating and prosecuting Concord.”

Friedrich cited opinions by three other federal judges – Amy Berman Jackson, who oversaw Manafort’s criminal foreign lobbying case; T.S. Ellis, who oversees Manafort’s financial fraud case; and D.C. District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell – to back up her decision.

All three judges also denied requests to invalidate Mueller’s authority, with Howell writing as recently as late July that a witness subpoenaed to turn over documents and to testify before the grand jury about Roger Stone must do so. That witness, Andrew Miller, has been held in contempt of the court and now may appeal.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24853
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#297

Post by bob » Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:30 pm

Sibley's blog:
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Wants to Hear From Me?!
:
I was very surprised this week to learn that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit accepted[*] my request to file an Amicus Curiae brief in the case of Miller v. United States of America. Andrew Miller, who once worked as an aide to Trump ally Roger Stone, has been held in contempt of court for refusing to testify before a grand jury in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Miller attempted to quash his subpoena, but a judge ruled this month that he would have to testify. Oral arguments in the matter are scheduled for November 8, two days after the midterm elections.

What makes this curious is that it is unusual to allow amicus curiae briefs in a criminal matter. Yet, by an Order entered October 11, 2018, that is exactly what the Circuit Court did and now I have filed my Amicus Curiae brief. Here is what is more curious:

•Jeannie S. Rhee of the Department of Justice -- who represented Hillary Clinton during the 2015 lawsuit regarding her private emails and the Clinton Foundation in a racketeering case -- agreed to my filing of the brief; and
•The issue I raise -- that has not been raised on appeal by either the government or counsel for Andrew Miller -- is arguably dispositive: Regardless of whether Mr. Mueller initially had the authority for his investigation into Russian Collusion, by statute found at 5 U.S. Code §3346 Mr. Mueller's authority ended 210 days after he was appointed by Mr. Rosenstein. That date was December 17, 2017, and every action taken by him thereafter is void. See: 5 U.S.C. §3348(d)("any function or duty of a vacant office’ performed by a person not properly serving under the statute shall have no force or effect.”)
•Will I be allowed to argue orally? What does all this mean?

You tell me.
:mememe:

What it means: There's no harm in filing -- and then ignoring -- Sibley's :yankyank: . The court isn't going to invite Sibley to argue; he'll have to make a motion, and that I expect will be denied (if he ever makes it).


* D.C. Cir.'s order granting Sibley leave to file his brief. Sibley "curiously" omits that one judge on the panel would have denied leave.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 7067
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Sibley's Dumb Lawsuits

#298

Post by Northland10 » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:01 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Oct 25, 2018 8:30 pm

What it means: There's no harm in filing -- and then ignoring -- Sibley's :yankyank: . The court isn't going to invite Sibley to argue; he'll have to make a motion, and that I expect will be denied (if he ever makes it).

* D.C. Cir.'s order granting Sibley leave to file his brief. Sibley "curiously" omits that one judge on the panel would have denied leave.
I noticed that it was a motion to submit an AC late. The loons can't even :mememe: on time.


North-land: of the family 10
UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

Post Reply

Return to “Eligibility Lawsuits”