BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

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

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#251

Post by TexasFilly » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:08 am

Clinton, Carter, they both start with a "C" and both are communists!!!!!!


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill! I believe Dr. Ford!

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

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#252

Post by Piffle » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:33 am

Orly is incensed at the duplicity of defendants' opposition. Incensed, I tellz ya.Plaintiffs specifically argued that Rule 60 motion should be granted under Rule 60b(2) and (6)Plaintiffs conveniently twisted the pleading and claimed that the motion is filed under rule 60b(2) and therefore it is untimely. However time limitation is only under rule 60b1,2 and 3.Think about it.



User avatar
ObjectiveDoubter
Posts: 3453
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:19 pm
Location: Hollywood (more or less)

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#253

Post by ObjectiveDoubter » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:39 am

Oh my heavens!





Crazy, unhinged, delusional pretend lawyer Orly says:


Plaintiffs conveniently twisted the pleading and claimed that the motion is filed under rule 60b(2) and therefore it is untimely. However time limitation is only under rule 60 bl,2 and 3. There is no time limitation on Rule 60b(6).I am guessing this is wrong, right? What is she TRYING to say here? (Since IANAL http://www.sheknows.com/graphics/emoticons/blabla.gif)





New Orly thesaurus lookup: SHAMELESSLY. Egads, she needs to be sanctioned just for her use of hyperbole. http://www.sheknows.com/graphics/emotic ... tchair.gif




Edit: Okay, I found this on my own: Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time—and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.[tab=30](1-3: Fraud, new info, mistake) So she is being ridiculous as usual? [-X Can't she read? Not even being a lawyer, I found this one, FCOL. It's a no-brainer. Why won't they sanction this witch for wasting valuable Court resources, for being unprofessional? I do not understand!



User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 4603
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#254

Post by MsDaisy » Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:41 am

Clinton, Carter, they both start with a "C" and both are communists!!!!!!And communist also starts with a "C", but Obama starts with an "O" even though he is a Communist.





Obama = Communist = "OC" which also stands for Orange County which is where Judge David "O" "C"arter is! :shock:





If this isn't undeniable proof beyond any doubt that Judge Carter is under Obama's communist thumb I just don't know what is.





Orlylogic Continues to rule.... OMG... There it is again, OC!





Well I'm convinced.


Birfers are toast

Emma
Posts: 3909
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:25 am

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#255

Post by Emma » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:38 am

Orly is incensed at the duplicity of defendants' opposition. Incensed, I tellz ya.Plaintiffs specifically argued that Rule 60 motion should be granted under Rule 60b(2) and (6)Plaintiffs conveniently twisted the pleading and claimed that the motion is filed under rule 60b(2) and therefore it is untimely. However time limitation is only under rule 60b1,2 and 3.[highlight]Think about it[/highlight].I can't. Vertigo makes me throw up.



User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8645
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#256

Post by Kriselda Gray » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:42 am

[highlight]This court did not give the same consideration, did not grant the same due process and equal protection to Plaintiffs who challenged Obama, as it gave to the plaintiffs, whose action would indirectly benefit Obama.[/highlight] ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) I really don't get how she can be so stupid as to think that someone's actually going to fall for this crap that what Arpio came up with is (1) new, (b) evidence or (c) "proves" anything. I think she believes she's being clever and all that by finding a backdoor way into the courts and that if she can scare the judges enough with her RICORICORICO threats and allegations of corruption, partisanship or abuse of discretion they'll overlook the fact that there's absolutely NOTHING of substance in her filing. I just pray that Judge Carter will FINALLY be pushed far enough that he'll knock a home run ball right through her skull - though it'd be purely cosmetic damage since there's nothing in there to actually damage.... (NADT!) It's such an embarrassment that this cretin wants to call herself an "American."Blech.


Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush

SCMP = SovCits/Militias/Patriots.

Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
-----
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants...

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 28626
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#257

Post by Addie » Tue Aug 28, 2012 10:44 am

How so, please?





.. Obama's forged identification papers was adjudicated 22 on the merits, knowing that it was never adjudicated on the merits and Res Judicata does not apply).


¡Sterngard! come home.

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27163
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#258

Post by Foggy » Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:03 pm

Or'ly's looking for a judge who was appointed by Алексе́й Никола́евич Косы́гин. ;;)


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief.
And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large. :mrgreen:

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34576
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#259

Post by realist » Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:16 pm

Or'ly's looking for a judge who was appointed by Алексе́й Никола́евич Косы́гин. ;;) :lol:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

tjh
Posts: 2936
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#260

Post by tjh » Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:10 pm

REFUSAL TO GRANT A LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WILL REPRESENT A VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS UNDER A COLOR OF AUTHORITY



hitch
Posts: 616
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 5:52 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#261

Post by hitch » Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:39 pm

Orly finally explains how under 60(b)6 her SAC of :turd: should allowed to be filed.It serves justice for the court to review the evidence provided and grant the leave of court to file the Second Amended Complaint. =)) =)) =)) =))



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34576
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#262

Post by realist » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:05 pm

REFUSAL TO GRANT A LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WILL REPRESENT A VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS UNDER A COLOR OF AUTHORITYCuz... none of the defendants have those rights. ](*,) In fact, only birthers have those rights... and more particularly only Orly Taitz has any constitutional rights such as free speech, freedom of the press, freedom from being bombarded with frivolous baseless lawsuits and the like. #-o


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

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

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#263

Post by Piffle » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:08 pm

REFUSAL TO GRANT A LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WILL REPRESENT A VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS UNDER A COLOR OF COLORED IN AUTHORITYFIFH.



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34576
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#264

Post by realist » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:20 pm

REFUSAL TO GRANT A LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WILL REPRESENT A VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS UNDER A COLOR OF COLORED IN AUTHORITYFIFH. :-bd


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
ObjectiveDoubter
Posts: 3453
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:19 pm
Location: Hollywood (more or less)

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#265

Post by ObjectiveDoubter » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:23 pm

Is it EVER possible to interpret that clause she is quoting re: timing, that only 1), 2), and 3) are time-limited to a year, but 6) is not? I see how if you were inexperienced, you might read the paragraph that way, but I would be appalled if the law worked that way -- anyone could deem something "justified," and litigate to reopen a dead, dead, dead civil matter? Can you imagine how Defendants would feel if cases were never dead, cuz justice had to be served. Differently. And all over again!



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27163
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#266

Post by Foggy » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:44 pm

Finally catching up with the reply, I learned that my civil rights have been annexed. She makes it sound like that's a bad thing. :-


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief.
And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large. :mrgreen:

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#267

Post by raicha » Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:55 pm

Is it EVER possible to interpret that clause she is quoting re: timing, that only 1), 2), and 3) are time-limited to a year, but 6) is not? I see how if you were inexperienced, you might read the paragraph that way, but I would be appalled if the law worked that way -- anyone could deem something "justified," and litigate to reopen a dead, dead, dead civil matter? Can you imagine how Defendants would feel if cases were never dead, cuz justice had to be served. Differently. And all over again!The law is that way. 6) allows for extraordinary cases where it would be a great injustice to time-bar the motion.But Taitz relies pretty much exclusively on her "new evidence" and makes no legal argument for 6).Brunt toast.



A Legal Lohengrin
Posts: 10415
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#268

Post by A Legal Lohengrin » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:27 pm

The law is that way. 6) allows for extraordinary cases where it would be a great injustice to time-bar the motion."Extraordinary" also does mean nothing short of extraordinary. I think someone could go a lifetime of practice without seeing a motion granted under 6).



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

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#269

Post by Piffle » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:31 pm

"Extraordinary" also does mean nothing short of extraordinary. I think someone could go a lifetime of practice without seeing a motion granted under 6).Agreed. You need something like a decedent who's willing to testify that he's not as dead as the court ruled he was.



User avatar
verbalobe
Posts: 8511
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 5:27 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#270

Post by verbalobe » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:51 pm

You need something like a decedent who's willing to testify that he's not as dead as the court ruled he was.Like this?http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8437/7883 ... bc8a_o.jpg



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27163
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#271

Post by Foggy » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:57 pm

:shock: =))


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief.
And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large. :mrgreen:

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

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#272

Post by Piffle » Tue Aug 28, 2012 5:59 pm

Like this?Yes, quite! =)) =)) Brilliant.



User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2307
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 8:47 pm

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#273

Post by Mark » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:04 pm

[BBvideo 425,350:3pb70qp6][/BBvideo]


And that's all I have to say about that. :smoking:

User avatar
ObjectiveDoubter
Posts: 3453
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 6:19 pm
Location: Hollywood (more or less)

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#274

Post by ObjectiveDoubter » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:19 pm

You need something like a decedent who's willing to testify that he's not as dead as the court ruled he was.Like this?http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8437/7883 ... bc8a_o.jpg[tab=30]http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/crying.gif Thanks all of you for explaining. My head just spins with this stuff. When I think that I was admitted to law school and didn't go, I realize it was the smartest move I accidently ever made. (Plus, UCLA Bus School had cuter boys that the Law School.)



IllAlien
Posts: 106
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:47 am

BARNETT|KEYES (REDUX) :) (ACT IV) ?

#275

Post by IllAlien » Tue Aug 28, 2012 7:26 pm

You need something like a decedent who's willing to testify that he's not as dead as the court ruled he was.Like this?http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8437/7883 ... bc8a_o.jpg[tab=30]http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/laughing/crying.gif Thanks all of you for explaining. My head just spins with this stuff. When I think that I was admitted to law school and didn't go, I realize it was the smartest move I accidently ever made. (Plus, UCLA Bus School had cuter boys that the Law School.)Ok, I get that "he's" not dead yet and he is even still standing, but does he magically now have standing?



Post Reply

Return to “Birther Case Discussion”