VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

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

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1076

Post by Piffle » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:07 pm

But...but...Shirley there's a lengthy opinion forthcoming to assplain legal stuff, right? I mean, the whole reason Larry had to elevate this to a high-Voeltzage case is because the intermediate appellate court didn't 'splain their mysterious reasons for shit-canning his masterpiece.Oh, the unjustice of it all! :-({|=



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

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1077

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:11 pm

But...but...Shirley there's a lengthy opinion forthcoming to assplain legal stuff, right? I mean, the whole reason Larry had to elevate this to a high-Voeltzage case is because the intermediate appellate court didn't 'splain their mysterious reasons for shit-canning his masterpiece.Oh, the unjustice of it all! :-({|=There is only this characterization of the court's opinion communicating to Klayman what the court thinks of him, his case, and the horse he rode in on:Sekrit Stuffs!
:twoup:



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34518
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1078

Post by realist » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:17 pm

But...but...Shirley there's a lengthy opinion forthcoming to assplain legal stuff, right? I mean, the whole reason Larry had to elevate this to a high-Voeltzage case is because the intermediate appellate court didn't 'splain their mysterious reasons for shit-canning his masterpiece.Oh, the unjustice of it all! :-({|=There is only this characterization of the court's opinion communicating to Klayman what the court thinks of him, his case, and the horse he rode in on:Sekrit Stuffs!
:twoup:
=))


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14920
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1079

Post by Reality Check » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:40 pm

:-({|= :-({|= Alabamy here I come ... :-({|= :-({|=


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1080

Post by mimi » Mon Jul 01, 2013 3:49 pm

Is it really dead, jim?



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15876
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1081

Post by Suranis » Mon Jul 01, 2013 4:38 pm

Its only dead if we have any doubt that its not real.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3666
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1082

Post by Paul Lentz » Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:20 pm

Is it really dead, jim?Well, they can take it to SCOTUS, but it'll cost Voeltz some serious bucks to do that--including KKKlayman's fees. I'm sure KKKlayman would love to continue to collect the bucks from Voeltz, and the past suggests that Voeltz is a gullible fool who can be talked into pretty much anything, so I wouldn't be surprised to see a SCOTUS petition.


The love of power will not win over the power of love.
Orlando, Florida 6/12/16

AnitaMaria
Posts: 4360
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1083

Post by AnitaMaria » Mon Jul 01, 2013 9:46 pm

Something's not adding up here. Right now, the Florida Supreme Court docket for this case does not include an entry saying it was denied. The last entry if is from 6/14, denying some nut's motion to submit an amicus brief.[link]Florida Supreme Court Docket, Voeltz v Obama,http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_ ... earchType=[/link][/break1]us/photo/my-images/854/zns.jpg/]http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4775/zns.jpg



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34518
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1084

Post by realist » Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:12 pm

Something's not adding up here. Right now, the Florida Supreme Court docket for this case does not include an entry saying it was denied. The last entry if is from 6/14, denying some nut's motion to submit an amicus brief.[link]Florida Supreme Court Docket, Voeltz v Obama,http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_ ... earchType=[/link][/break1]us/photo/my-images/854/zns.jpg/]http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/4775/zns.jpgNo idea. It was there earlier. I didn't make it up. :lol: It was also posted at ORYR when I popped in there this afternoon. :-k


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14920
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1085

Post by Reality Check » Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:20 pm

Maybe the clerk jumped the gun before the dismissal was all signed and sealed? :roll:


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 7228
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Trouble's Howse

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1086

Post by Estiveo » Mon Jul 01, 2013 10:58 pm

Wait, Realist says that he saw it, but he IS having eye surgery...


Image Image Image Image Image

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

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1087

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:31 am

Braille.



TexasFilly
Posts: 17964
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1088

Post by TexasFilly » Tue Jul 02, 2013 12:57 am

Braille. [-X


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill! I believe Dr. Ford!

AnitaMaria
Posts: 4360
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1089

Post by AnitaMaria » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:09 pm

I guess the notation on the Florida Supreme Court docket indicating that Voeltz's writ had been denied was incorrect. Voeltz is pissed because ORYR posted that the case was d-e-a-d when it was not. He sent [link]OBC,http://obamaballotchallenge.com/false-a ... both-sides[/link] a snotty email where he says everyone is an obot or controlled opposition except him. “It doesn’t say “disp denied”, and you certainly are implying that the case has been thrown out, TRUMPETING IT IN FACT, when that is not the case at all. You have never even discussed the merits of the case AT ALL. That and the way you jump to conclusions about everything and trumpet the OBOT Taitz, who has no standing to bring ANY CASE she has filed (and which are meant to discredit the “eligibility” question), make me wonder who’s side you are on (rightfully). I am one of the few in this whole country that has standing to ask the question of whether Obama is eligible— given by Florida statute 102.168(1)(3)(b), yet you dismiss me with “take it up with them”. You have shown your true colors. I also wonder about Arpaio, since Obama swore on his Arizona election certificate that he is a natural born Citizen, Arpaio certainly has a legal duty to prosecute Obama in Arizona if he is privy to info that a crime has been committed, yet he keeps saying that Congress should do it. You are all controlled opposition. [...]Why don’t you cover the real Constitutional aspects of this Constitutional question rather than the histrionics of Taitz, or Mr. Magoo Arpaio? Probably because you are controlled opposition. There is a reason that NO COURT in Fla. will answer my question— they don’t want to lie— so they lie and deny me standing rather than lie about Obama’s eligibility. I will make them ALL lie, because I have perfect standing to ask that question, given by Fl. statutes.That’s it? an “update” that “disp denied” does not exist on the docket? I would think that messing with the Supreme Court of Fla. Docket is a BIG STORY, especially when I talked to the Clerk of the Court just a few days ago. Nothing to see here?Do you even know what my Petition for Writ of Mandamus says, or even what a Writ of Mandamus is? Do you know anything? I still see a false headline… hmmmm…….”PlaintiffEvery ounce of energy these losers expend fighting each other is one ounce less that they can use to harass civil servants in the court system and the innocent defendants they vexatiously pursue. Keep up the good work, losers.



User avatar
BillTheCat
Posts: 4496
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:25 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1090

Post by BillTheCat » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:54 pm

Shorter Voeltz: :((


'But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice. 'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.'
-Lewis Carroll

Mr. Gneiss
Posts: 1566
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 12:37 am

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1091

Post by Mr. Gneiss » Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:09 pm

“There is a reason that NO COURT in Fla. will answer my question— they don’t want to lie— so they lie and deny me standing rather than lie about Obama’s eligibility. I will make them ALL lie, because I have [highlight]perfect standing[/highlight] to ask that question, given by Fl. statutes.Now there's some crenulated reasoning. :crazy:





He did learn one thing from Orly....he has perfect standing.



User avatar
Paul Lentz
Posts: 3666
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: Downtown O-town

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1092

Post by Paul Lentz » Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:42 pm

I guess the notation on the Florida Supreme Court docket indicating that Voeltz's writ had been denied was incorrect. Voeltz is pissed because ORYR posted that the case was d-e-a-d when it was not. He sent [link]OBC,http://obamaballotchallenge.com/false-a ... both-sides[/link] a snotty email where he says everyone is an obot or controlled opposition except him. “blah blah Every ounce of energy these losers expend fighting each other is one ounce less that they can use to harass civil servants in the court system and the innocent defendants they vexatiously pursue. Keep up the good work, losers.A couple of excerpts from OBC's referenced posting fascinate me:1. From: Larry Klayman To: George J. Miller Sent: Wed, Jul 3, 2013 10:24 amSubject: Re: FL caseThe issue was just paying a fee for the mandamus petition. Nothing has been dismissed.Typical xxxx inspired bullxxxx.On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Larry Klayman wrote:Nothing was dismissed. Its going forward….On Wed, [highlight]Jul 31, 2013[/highlight] at 9:56 AM, wrote:Any commentary on this? I wasn’t going to run anything until I heard from you.[/break1]blogspot.com/2013/07/voeltz-vs-obama-update-in-obama-id.html]http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot ... ma-id.htmlRegards,George MillerSo, "George Miller" now has possession of the Tardis? And is now able to send emails dated "Jul 31, 2013"? And, it appears that somebody managed to pitch in the $300 filing fee to cure the default (and thus the automatic 'denied' disposition). To be fair, since the fee for an appeal to the SCoFL is paid through the District Court of Appeal (in this case, the 1st District, which was the appellate court), the error could have easily been in the transaction process/documents between the 1DCA and the SCoFL. It happens...too frequently for anyone to conjure some bizarre conspiracy theory out of simple bureaucratic inefficiency.2. I just talked to the Clerk of the Fl. Supreme Court last Thuesday, and she said that the writ is still “being considered” and that there “is no timetable” for the court to act. [highlight]Also I noticed a part in the Docket that was not there before— that I could be subject to “sanctions”. That was not there before Thursday.[/highlight] ORYR still has a false headline up about the case being denied, with a small “update” now underneath. I would think that screwing with and changing a Supreme Court Docket is BIG NEWS— No? [highlight]I repeat– the part about “sanctions” was never on the docket until now.[/highlight]O'Rly? The docket entry, dated 4/8/13, says, "Petitioner's notice, filed in this Court on March 12, 2013, has been treated as a petition for writ of mandamus seeking reinstatement of the proceedings in the district court of appeal below. Petitioner is allowed to and including April 29, 2013, in which to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus; that complies with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, addressing why the proceedings in the district court of appeal should not have been dismissed. [highlight]The failure to file a proper petition with this Court within the time provided could result in the imposition of sanctions[/highlight], including dismissal of this case. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.410. Please understand that once this case is dismissed, it may not be subject to reinstatement."There's nothing new or recently added in that docket entry. As our own Bob [link]noted,http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopi ... 50#p495028[/link], in a post dated 4/10/13, the docket entry was the same, including the language referring to potential sanctions.Voeltz is--among other things--either an idiot, or illiterate, or both. :roll:


The love of power will not win over the power of love.
Orlando, Florida 6/12/16

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

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1093

Post by Piffle » Wed Jul 03, 2013 10:46 pm

“It doesn’t say “disp denied”, and you certainly are implying that the case has been thrown out, TRUMPETING IT IN FACT, when that is not the case at all. You have never even discussed the merits of the case AT ALL. That and the way you jump to conclusions about everything and [highlight]trumpet the OBOT Taitz[/highlight], who has no standing to bring ANY CASE she has filed (and which are meant to discredit the “eligibility” question), make me wonder who’s side you are on (rightfully)
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1094

Post by bob » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:24 pm

[/break1]flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket?p_caseyear=2013&p_casenumber=560&psCourt=FSC&psSearchType=]SCOFL:Because petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000).


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1095

Post by mimi » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:47 pm

YAY FOR SMACKDOWN FRIDAY!!!



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

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1096

Post by Piffle » Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:55 pm

[/break1]flcourts.org/pls/docket/ds_docket?p_caseyear=2013&p_casenumber=560&psCourt=FSC&psSearchType=]SCOFL:Because petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested, he is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is hereby denied. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000).From the time they actually got around to paying the filing fee, that didn't take long at all. :lol: :explode:



AnitaMaria
Posts: 4360
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1097

Post by AnitaMaria » Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:01 pm

Lucky for Larry he has that whole coup thing in the works for November. So, we should be seeing frog-marching by Thanksgiving even with this defeat.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1098

Post by bob » Fri Sep 27, 2013 6:46 pm

ORYR [/break1]birtherreport.com/2013/09/breaking-florida-supreme-court-denied.html#IDComment726450675]comment:


We need an audit of every judge's bank account that presided over any soetero case. The fix has been in. If the banking looks like bribes are hidden elsewhere it may be blackmail for any reason these judges have to hide.





We must face the fact of zero integrity in the entire governmental system. It will soon be everyone for themselves. Survival mode is around the corner. Frankly, we can do without a Federal gov. Our state and local authorities can handle the law breakers since from the top down the biggest criminals exist with impunity as Federal government politicians.Of course, if such an audit revealed no irregularities, the "banksters"* would be blamed for running interference.





* Sekrit Stuffs!
JOOOOOOS!!!


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Tarrant
Posts: 1492
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:05 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1099

Post by Tarrant » Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:28 pm

I love the leaps of "logic".The judges must have been bribed.If no evidence of bribery, they must be being blackmailed.If no evidence of blackmail, check for alien intervention.If no evidence of aliens, check for threats against their person or family.If no threats against them, check for George Soros' threat to crash the entire planetary money system single-handedly.If there no evidence even one of those things happened...then they're in on the conspiracy and should be jailed and executed.Of course at no time is the possibility that the birthers might have no case examined in the line...



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

VOELTZ - FL BALLOT CHALLENGE (ACTS I II & III)

#1100

Post by bob » Fri Sep 27, 2013 8:04 pm

I love the leaps of "logic".The judges must have been bribed.If no evidence of bribery, they must be being blackmailed.If no evidence of blackmail, check for alien intervention.If no evidence of aliens, check for threats against their person or family.If no threats against them, check for George Soros' threat to crash the entire planetary money system single-handedly.If there no evidence even one of those things happened...then they're in on the conspiracy and should be jailed and executed.Of course at no time is the possibility that the birthers might have no case examined in the line...[/break1]birtherreport.com/2013/09/breaking-florida-supreme-court-denied.html#IDComment726491534]Don't be silly!:The judges in these cases have been contacted and threatened by the White House and TOLD exactly how to rule. Use common sense. If there was no case,[highlight]why are these brave lawyers repeatedly bringing these cases before the Courts[/highlight]?This is not rocket science....the Courts have been compromised by the Executive branch of the Federal government. The exact same thing happened in Germany 1935, Cuba, Soviet Russia and China. The USA is currently a Dictatorship. There is no other explanation.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “State Ballot Challenges”