The Post and Email

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34519
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10076

Post by realist » Sun Aug 26, 2018 9:16 am

Ankeny, of all the birther cases I can think of off the top of my head, was also the best chance birthers had of getting a case to SCOTUS which they would hear. Alas, they did not attempt to do so.

I’ve always wondered why but also always suspected they did not really want a SCOTUS opinion because they knew the result would be against their flawed theories of 2 citizen parents, 3 (or 4 in some cases) types of citizens, etc.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10077

Post by Suranis » Sun Aug 26, 2018 9:42 am

It's for thew some reason they never took a case in Hawaii. Hawaii was the one place in the world where BHOs birth cert could really be challenged. Everywhere else; the full faith and credit clause would apply as an obstacle. But despite their 50 state strategy, Hawaii was the place they avoided like the plague, with the exception of Arpiao's publicity stunt and Orly trying to get discovery using another case. And Miki Booth could have started such a case.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10078

Post by bob » Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:40 pm

Booth hasn't lived in Hawaii for years and years.

Andy Martin filled a case. As did Sunahara's brother. And didn't Wolf as well? Taitz had her two cases.

But challenging Obama's certificate had the fundamental problem of there being no admissible evidence upon which to base a challenge.

The thing about birthers that surprised me was they had from 2009 to 2012 to organize: research which states have the most favorable ballot-challenge laws, recruit name-brand plaintiffs, etc. Instead it was an unorganized, scattershot mess. Really, their best success was in Alabama, where two state supreme court justices (including Roy Moore) said the secretary of state had the authority to investigate a candidate.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9409
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10079

Post by Mikedunford » Sun Aug 26, 2018 2:55 pm

realist wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 9:16 am
Ankeny, of all the birther cases I can think of off the top of my head, was also the best chance birthers had of getting a case to SCOTUS which they would hear. Alas, they did not attempt to do so.

I’ve always wondered why but also always suspected they did not really want a SCOTUS opinion because they knew the result would be against their flawed theories of 2 citizen parents, 3 (or 4 in some cases) types of citizens, etc.
IIRC, Ankeny was fairly early in the phenomenon, and I think he was pro se all the way, so he may just have run out of steam. And was he ever really a player in the online lunatic communities?


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9409
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10080

Post by Mikedunford » Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:03 pm

bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:40 pm
Booth hasn't lived in Hawaii for years and years.

Andy Martin filled a case. As did Sunahara's brother. And didn't Wolf as well? Taitz had her two cases.

But challenging Obama's certificate had the fundamental problem of there being no admissible evidence upon which to base a challenge.

The thing about birthers that surprised me was they had from 2009 to 2012 to organize: research which states have the most favorable ballot-challenge laws, recruit name-brand plaintiffs, etc. Instead it was an unorganized, scattershot mess. Really, their best success was in Alabama, where two state supreme court justices (including Roy Moore) said the secretary of state had the authority to investigate a candidate.
Yeah. Martin was first. Orly and Wolf were around the same time as each other, with Wolf really flying under the radar - IIRC, the case wasn't on the radar until I found out about it, and that discovery didn't come about through following any of the online antics. Sunahara's brother also filed; I think Dean H was the one who was behind that, but I might be misremembering it.

And then, of course, there was Orly. I'm honestly not sure how many 'cases' Orly had, because it was after the point in her descent into the bowl when she had stopped distinguishing, so it's kind of hard to figure out how to score them. I mean, do her 1st Circuit antics count as one case, because she only ever 'filed' one 'case' - although I'm not sure she ever actually technically filed an actual complaint in that case - or does it get scored as two because she somehow wound up arguing a motion to compel in her Georgia shitshow toward the end of those proceedings?


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10081

Post by bob » Sun Aug 26, 2018 3:12 pm

Mikedunford wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 2:55 pm
IIRC, Ankeny was fairly early in the phenomenon, and I think he was pro se all the way, so he may just have run out of steam. And was he ever really a player in the online lunatic communities?
Yes, these plaintiffs (Steve Ankeny and Bill Kruse) were pro se (even on appeal). I recall birthers using that to downplay Ankeny's precedential value (as if case readers research the background and skills of the losing litigants).

Nonetheless, the Taitzes and Apuzzos could have attempted to perform a rescue mission, but didn't.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10477
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10082

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:05 pm

OK, question, they, the ubiquitous "they", take Ankeny to USSC, what possible grounds other than we don't like the ruling?


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
woodworker
Posts: 2628
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10083

Post by woodworker » Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:11 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:05 pm
OK, question, they, the ubiquitous "they", take Ankeny to USSC, what possible grounds other than we don't like the ruling?
What, aren't those sufficient grounds for a rwnj, or any republican. And I have to admit that it has worked. SCOTUS help part of the VRA void after all.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10084

Post by bob » Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:29 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:05 pm
OK, question, they, the ubiquitous "they", take Ankeny to USSC, what possible grounds other than we don't like the ruling?
That this is wrong:
COAoIN wrote:Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
E.g., the P&E comment:
James Carter wrote:Under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution the Supreme Court trumps all lower courts. That means Minor vs Happersett, for just one, trumps Ankenny
If only some brave birther had petitioned SCOTUS that Minor is the controlling authority! :roll:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10477
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10085

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:36 pm

bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:29 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:05 pm
OK, question, they, the ubiquitous "they", take Ankeny to USSC, what possible grounds other than we don't like the ruling?
That this is wrong:
COAoIN wrote:Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
E.g., the P&E comment:
James Carter wrote:Under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution the Supreme Court trumps all lower courts. That means Minor vs Happersett, for just one, trumps Ankenny
If only some brave birther had petitioned SCOTUS that Minor is the controlling authority! :roll:
That's what they are more or less arguing, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement in the circuits, so I'm still not seeing any real reason that would survive a dead list.


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: 24538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10086

Post by bob » Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:11 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:36 pm
That's what they are more or less arguing, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement in the circuits, so I'm still not seeing any real reason that would survive a dead list.
Oh, it wouldn't. But Ankeny was one of the few eligibility cases that ruled on the merits. And birthers didn't push it to SCOTUS. (Some might argue they preferred to not test their beliefs in SCOTUS.)


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10477
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10087

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:43 pm

bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:11 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:36 pm
That's what they are more or less arguing, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement in the circuits, so I'm still not seeing any real reason that would survive a dead list.
Oh, it wouldn't. But Ankeny was one of the few eligibility cases that ruled on the merits. And birthers didn't push it to SCOTUS. (Some might argue they preferred to not test their beliefs in SCOTUS.)
That's what I'm saying, Ankeny smacked them down hard, was based on TW0 precedential USSC cases and clearly smacked them down on the merits of their case, THEY LOST.


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
realist
Posts: 34519
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10088

Post by realist » Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:09 am

bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:11 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:36 pm
That's what they are more or less arguing, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement in the circuits, so I'm still not seeing any real reason that would survive a dead list.
Oh, it wouldn't. But Ankeny was one of the few eligibility cases that ruled on the merits. And birthers didn't push it to SCOTUS. (Some might argue they preferred to not test their beliefs in SCOTUS.)
Exactly. Which is pretty much what I said in my post.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34519
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10089

Post by realist » Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:11 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:43 pm
bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:11 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:36 pm
That's what they are more or less arguing, but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement in the circuits, so I'm still not seeing any real reason that would survive a dead list.
Oh, it wouldn't. But Ankeny was one of the few eligibility cases that ruled on the merits. And birthers didn't push it to SCOTUS. (Some might argue they preferred to not test their beliefs in SCOTUS.)
That's what I'm saying, Ankeny smacked them down hard, was based on TW0 precedential USSC cases and clearly smacked them down on the merits of their case, THEY LOST.
Of course they did. But because it was decided in the merits it was prime for filing cert at SCOTUS to try to get SCOTUS to say the Court was wrong and it’s really 2 citizen parents, etc.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9409
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10090

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:37 am

realist wrote:
Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:11 am
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:43 pm
bob wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:11 pm

Oh, it wouldn't. But Ankeny was one of the few eligibility cases that ruled on the merits. And birthers didn't push it to SCOTUS. (Some might argue they preferred to not test their beliefs in SCOTUS.)
That's what I'm saying, Ankeny smacked them down hard, was based on TW0 precedential USSC cases and clearly smacked them down on the merits of their case, THEY LOST.
Of course they did. But because it was decided in the merits it was prime for filing cert at SCOTUS to try to get SCOTUS to say the Court was wrong and it’s really 2 citizen parents, etc.
It was prime for cert. I think it was ego that kept things from getting further. Looking at the scorecard, all the major birther players were right in the middle of litigation at the time. Kerchner had just been dismissed, so the Putz was busy with his frivolous appeal. Ditto Barnett, which involved both Kreep and Orly, and Orly had also just been slapped down in Georgia and had that on her plate. Berg still had (I think) Hollister on appeal.

Taking up Ankeny - which had been litigated farther by pro se litigants than any of them had managed with any of their own cases - would have been a tacit admission that their own efforts weren't going to succeed. I don't think any of them could admit that.


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10091

Post by Suranis » Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:58 am

Could be. To misquote a famous saying, sometimes its best to attribute things to stupid ego rather than malicious scheming.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10092

Post by bob » Mon Aug 27, 2018 12:11 pm

Rondeau has another long, rambling story about "Michelle Robinson" (Kimberley D.) and her saga with CPS and the criminal courts in LA. (Latest update: Kimberley was charged with new crimes, but the prosecutor chose to drop the charges and instead is claiming she violated her probation.)

Kimberley is becoming increasing Fitzpatrick-esque (remember him?). "For fun," I started following her Twitter account, on which, when not harassing every governmental official that has crossed her path, she's teasing a tell-all expose (but I wonder if she'll expose her own name).

Rondeau will never see that her enabling adds to these people's problems.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: The Post and Email

#10093

Post by Northland10 » Mon Aug 27, 2018 4:09 pm

Suranis wrote:
Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:58 am
Could be. To misquote a famous saying, sometimes its best to attribute things to stupid ego rather than malicious scheming.
You just described the current President.


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

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 7847
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: DHS Psy-Ops HQ

Re: The Post and Email

#10094

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:58 am

Chuckles is still on a mission :smoking:




Charles Kerchner @cdrkerchner
13h13 hours ago

The Post & Email Interviews Atty. Mario Apuzzo on the 14th Amendment, Part 1 - The Post & Email https://www.thepostemail.com/2018/08/27 ... nt-part-1/ … #attorneymarioapuzzo #donaldtrump #potus #14thamendment #seanhannity #dobbs #tuckercarlson
1 reply 2 retweets 0 likes

T.F. Bow ‏ @t_f_bow
12h12 hours ago

Mario Apuzzo lost every birther case he filed, including Kerchner's. Not exactly someone knowledgeable
.



User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 6053
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10095

Post by Sam the Centipede » Tue Aug 28, 2018 2:52 am

Orlylicious wrote:
Tue Aug 28, 2018 12:58 am
:snippity:

T.F. Bow ‏ @t_f_bow
12h12 hours ago

Mario Apuzzo lost every birther case he filed, including Kerchner's. Not exactly someone knowledgeable
.
[/quote]
That's not thinking like A. Putzo: those cases were all victories :happyfamily: because Mario demonstrated that he knew better than the judge and opposing counsel. :kickface: Indeed his opponents' inferiority (oh yes, "opponents" includes the judge for Mario) was clear in their pathetic failure to understand and concur with his brilliant arguments.

Mario is alone in his special understanding of citizenship law.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 10477
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10096

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:46 am

Citizenship and Constitutional law you mean. :rotflmao:


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: 24538
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10097

Post by bob » Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:00 pm

P&E: Trump: Internet, Media “Suppression” “Will Be Addressed”:
WHAT DOES HE HAVE IN MIND?

Early Tuesday morning President Donald Trump tweeted, as he has in the past, his concerns about a bias on the part of “Google” and the U.S. news media for allegedly “suppressing voices of Conservatives and hiding information and news that is good.”

The results gleaned from a Google search using that term for this writer at 9:09 AM EDT are:


https://www.google.com/search?source=hp ... uEwOxJA5Fg

and contain the headlines, “Trump wakes up complaining about negative Google search results about himself. ‘Illegal?’” and “Trump rage-tweets Google alleging search ‘bias,’” the latter with an arguably unflattering photo of the 45th president.

A Yahoo! search completed minutes later yields one of the same Google-search articles, one from MSN and one from the BBC titled, “Trump attacks ‘left-wing’ Google search results.”

* * *

Although not categorizing itself as “conservative,” this publication’s Facebook traffic was reduced by approximately 90% after Facebook changed its algorithm in January. Our Twitter account recently lost 21 followers without an explanation, a number which was magnified exponentially by more prominent users of the platform.
I would leave a comment at Rondeau's about how each site can moderate its content, but ....


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34519
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: The Post and Email

#10098

Post by realist » Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:25 pm

bob wrote:I would leave a comment at Rondeau's about how each site can moderate its content, but ....
:lol:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: The Post and Email

#10099

Post by Northland10 » Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:36 pm

bob wrote:
Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:00 pm
P&E: Trump: Internet, Media “Suppression” “Will Be Addressed”:
WHAT DOES HE HAVE IN MIND?
Although not categorizing itself as “conservative,” this publication’s Facebook traffic was reduced by approximately 90% after Facebook changed its algorithm in January. Our Twitter account recently lost 21 followers without an explanation, a number which was magnified exponentially by more prominent users of the platform.
I would leave a comment at Rondeau's about how each site can moderate its content, but ....
Maybe some jerk should sue her for discriminating against jerks.

Poor Rharon, only had 21 Russian Bots following her.


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

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

Re: The Post and Email

#10100

Post by bob » Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:44 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Tue Aug 28, 2018 4:36 pm
Maybe some jerk should sue her for discriminating against jerks.
I will likely see Klayman next week! I'll ask him to represent me! :evil:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”