Larry Klayman

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2276

Post by bob » Sun Nov 12, 2017 11:25 am

PR Newswire: Jackie Beard Robinson Hires Famously Feisty Lawyer Larry Klayman To Represent Her In Dispute With New Jersey Housewives Star Melissa Gorga:
If you're a recognized fashion influencer and your inexperienced ex-retail partner trashes your reputation on National Television, you hire the toughest, fiercest attack-dog lawyer you can find. Right?

That's exactly what international fashion influencer Jackie Beard Robinson has done in retaining no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners lawyer Larry Klayman, to deal with her nemesis, New Jersey Housewives star Melissa Gorga.

* * *

"In January my client and Gorga had a falling out in their business relationship, but that doesn't mean Gorga had the right to bash her ex-partner's integrity publicly in press interviews and on Bravo's network that aired The Real Housewives of New Jersey," said Klayman.

Any business venture can hit a snag as it did in the Montclair, NJ boutique, Envy. A difference of opinion on the store's future direction turned ugly, but that's no excuse for disparaging your ex-partner so publicly.

"Gorga said it was her client's fault that led to shutting the boutique, yet of the two partners, Robinson was the only experienced one in fashion retail," said Klayman.

The two clashed on the seventh season of "Real Housewives of New Jersey" about the store's direction -- specifically about Robinson's desire to expand selection to accommodate shoppers who aren't, say, a size 2.
Klayman's clients who have lost defamation lawsuits: Gennifer Flowers, Dolly Kyle, Jared Stern, Patricia Smith and Charles Woods, Vincent Forras, Joseph Farah, Bradlee Dean, and Dennis Montgomery.

Klayman's clients who have won defamation lawsuits: Klayman. :think:


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34030
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2277

Post by realist » Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:17 pm

bob wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 11:25 am
PR Newswire: Jackie Beard Robinson Hires Famously Feisty Lawyer Larry Klayman To Represent Her In Dispute With New Jersey Housewives Star Melissa Gorga:
If you're a recognized fashion influencer and your inexperienced ex-retail partner trashes your reputation on National Television, you hire the toughest, fiercest attack-dog lawyer you can find. Right?

That's exactly what international fashion influencer Jackie Beard Robinson has done in retaining no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners lawyer Larry Klayman, to deal with her nemesis, New Jersey Housewives star Melissa Gorga.

* * *

"In January my client and Gorga had a falling out in their business relationship, but that doesn't mean Gorga had the right to bash her ex-partner's integrity publicly in press interviews and on Bravo's network that aired The Real Housewives of New Jersey," said Klayman.

Any business venture can hit a snag as it did in the Montclair, NJ boutique, Envy. A difference of opinion on the store's future direction turned ugly, but that's no excuse for disparaging your ex-partner so publicly.

"Gorga said it was her client's fault that led to shutting the boutique, yet of the two partners, Robinson was the only experienced one in fashion retail," said Klayman.

The two clashed on the seventh season of "Real Housewives of New Jersey" about the store's direction -- specifically about Robinson's desire to expand selection to accommodate shoppers who aren't, say, a size 2.
Klayman's clients who have lost defamation lawsuits: Gennifer Flowers, Dolly Kyle, Jared Stern, Patricia Smith and Charles Woods, Vincent Forras, Joseph Farah, Bradlee Dean, and Dennis Montgomery.

Klayman's clients who have won defamation lawsuits: Klayman. :think:
Also. Too.
NEWS PROVIDED BY
Larry Klayman
Nov 10, 2017, 15:19 ET


ImageX 4 (have met 36 Obots at meetups) Image X 4
Image

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 2685
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: Larry Klayman

#2278

Post by pipistrelle » Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:20 pm

Is it me, or does this guy spend more time writing self-serving press releases to be ignored than practicing law or representing clients?



Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 931
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Larry Klayman

#2279

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:24 pm

pipistrelle wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:20 pm
Is it me, or does this guy spend more time writing self-serving press releases to be ignored than practicing law or representing clients?
I think you have answered your own question.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2280

Post by bob » Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:40 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:24 pm
pipistrelle wrote:
Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:20 pm
Is it me, or does this guy spend more time writing self-serving press releases to be ignored than practicing law or representing clients?
I think you have answered your own question.
Klayman has other interests: Writing columns for Newsmax, WND, etc., explaining how awesome he is, and that he gets no respect; recycling those columns into a 4-volume collection; hawking that collection on his vanity radio show (called "Special Prosecutor"); circulating a petition for him to be named an actual special prosecutor, etc.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
tek
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 6:02 pm
Location: Happy Valley, MA
Occupation: Damned if I know

Re: Larry Klayman

#2281

Post by tek » Sun Nov 12, 2017 4:27 pm

[...] international fashion influencer Jackie Beard Robinson
[...] no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners lawyer Larry Klayman
Sounds like they deserve each other.


Fast talkin' guys with strange red eyes
Have put things in your head
And started your mind to wonderin'

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8734
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2282

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:00 pm

I have to say that I read that first paragraph and didn't recognize one name, or care, except GIL's. After I finished it all I am still in a serious don't care state. All I can figure is that idiot one couldn't find a lawyer to take her case and that somehow she got introduced to GIL. From what I read and the fact that she is going with GIL tells me she has a dog of a case. I hope she has deep pockets because he will cost her a bundle to get no where, and I wonder if GIL bothered to tell her that truth is a defense to her complaint, or that since she is allegedly a "media figure" she may not even be able to take this to court?

In other words, a typical GIL case.


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: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2283

Post by bob » Thu Nov 16, 2017 2:56 pm

Grossly Inappropriate Larry Klayman, regarding Bill O'Reilly and Roy Moore:
Klayman to O'Reilly: Those in Glass Houses Should Not Throw Stones!
Somewhere, an irony meter explodes, destroying an entire subdivision of glass homes.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2284

Post by bob » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:00 pm

FW: Klayman and Freedom Watch Sue Sessions, DOJ and FBI to Force Investigation Into Illegal Leaks and Conflicts by Mueller!:
Today, Larry Klayman, the founder of both Judicial Watch and now Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Case No. 1:17-CV-02459) to force Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray and the heads of the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and Inspector General (IG) to expeditiously investigate and remedy the continuing illegal grand jury leaks and conflicts of interest emanating from the Office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Having previously filed an administrative complaint with OPR and IG, and these investigative arms of the Justice Department having failed to take action, Freedom Watch's complaint asks the district court to order investigations and once the illegal leaks and conflicts are confirmed, to compel the termination of Special Counsel Mueller.
Klayman wrote:It is time that someone take action to stem the criminal and otherwise illegal activity of Mueller and his staff. He is not above the law and must play by the same rules as all federal prosecutors. Mueller's jihad against President Trump and his present and former colleagues is abhorrent and a huge waste of taxpayer money destructive of the nation's body politic during these dire times, but even were this 'witch hunt' legitimate, there is no ethical or legal justification in using leaks of grand jury information and activities to destroy lives before defendants and putative defendants are even indicted and tried before a jury of their peers. Mueller, who is not a man of integrity but simply a Washington establishment politician, must now have to answer himself to the bar of justice.

Freedom Watch is taking this action since Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, an Obama holdover as U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland, himself has a conflict of interest and has abdicated his duty to police Special Counsel Mueller! Rosenstein has and will put his Democrat leaning politics ahead of duty!
Klayman's Freedom Watch's complaint; its prayer:
A writ of mandamus compelling Defendants to conduct an immediate, thorough investigation into torrent of leaks coming from Mr. Mueller and his staff, as well as unethical conflicts of interest, pertaining to the Mueller Investigation and an order compelling Mr. Sessions and the USDOJ to order the removal of Mr. Mueller and his staff from the investigation when the investigation reveals that the leaks did originate from Mr. Mueller and his staff.
:mememe:


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#2285

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:46 pm

I'm so glad Larry did not weigh down the complaint with trivial things like citing authorities that show starting an investigation is a mandatory not discretionary act.


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

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8734
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2286

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:20 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 2:56 pm
Grossly Inappropriate Larry Klayman, regarding Bill O'Reilly and Roy Moore:
Klayman to O'Reilly: Those in Glass Houses Should Not Throw Stones!
Somewhere, an irony meter explodes, destroying an entire subdivision of glass homes.
Oh, the irony, the double and triple irony, nay even quadruple irony. :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:46 pm
I'm so glad Larry did not weigh down the complaint with trivial things like citing authorities that show starting an investigation is a mandatory not discretionary act.
Or even to bother to point to any evidence that there was any validity to his complaint. Nah, not a GIL thing.

Yanno, the DC circuit could have avoided all this if they'd just get off their hindmost and disbar GIL like they should have two years ago, but then think of all the fun and wasted time they'd have missed out on. :sarcasm:


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
Northland10
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#2287

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:38 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:20 pm
Yanno, the DC circuit could have avoided all this if they'd just get off their hindmost and disbar GIL like they should have two years ago, but then think of all the fun and wasted time they'd have missed out on. :sarcasm:
His discipline is waiting for the DC Court of Appeals (DC's version of a state court) not the US District Court for the District of Columbia. But yes, it would be nice for them to take care of GIL.


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

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8734
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2288

Post by Notorial Dissent » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:51 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:38 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:20 pm
Yanno, the DC circuit could have avoided all this if they'd just get off their hindmost and disbar GIL like they should have two years ago, but then think of all the fun and wasted time they'd have missed out on. :sarcasm:
His discipline is waiting for the DC Court of Appeals (DC's version of a state court) not the US District Court for the District of Columbia. But yes, it would be nice for them to take care of GIL.
Whatever, he should have been disbarred two years ago.


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
Northland10
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#2289

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:57 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:51 pm
Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:38 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:20 pm
Yanno, the DC circuit could have avoided all this if they'd just get off their hindmost and disbar GIL like they should have two years ago, but then think of all the fun and wasted time they'd have missed out on. :sarcasm:
His discipline is waiting for the DC Court of Appeals (DC's version of a state court) not the US District Court for the District of Columbia. But yes, it would be nice for them to take care of GIL.
Whatever, he should have been disbarred two years ago.
Only 2? I'd add a zero to that number.


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

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 5778
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#2290

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:00 pm

Maybe I can help GIL with a citation.
Beals v Holder, US District Court for Minnesota wrote:The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has explained that –
“‘[T]he remedy of mandamus is a drastic one, to be invoked only in extraordinary situations...’ A federal court is justified in issuing a writ of mandamus, therefore, only if a petitioner is able to establish a ‘clear and indisputable right’ to the relief sought, the defendant has a nondiscretionary duty to honor that right, and the petitioner has no other adequate alternative administrative or judicial remedy.”
In re Lane, 801 F.2d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir.1986) (emphasis added), quoting Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc., 449 U.S. 33, 34 (1980), and Borntrager v. Stevas, 772 F.2d 419, 420 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1008 (1985). See also In re SDDS, Inc., 97 F.3d 1030, 1034 (8th Cir. 1996) (“[t]he issuance of a writ of mandamus ‘is a drastic remedy to be invoked only in extraordinary situations,’... and may issue ‘only if a petitioner is able to establish a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought, the defendant has a nondiscretionary duty to honor that right, and the petitioner has no other adequate alternative administrative or judicial remedy’”) (citations omitted)
Hmm.. maybe that wouldn't help so much.


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

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2291

Post by bob » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:16 pm

Hey: If the DOJ doesn't appoint you as a special prosecutor, and the vanity petition for such an appointment is being ignored, sometimes you gotta mandamus for what you want.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8734
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2292

Post by Notorial Dissent » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:44 am

Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:57 pm
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:51 pm
Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:38 pm

His discipline is waiting for the DC Court of Appeals (DC's version of a state court) not the US District Court for the District of Columbia. But yes, it would be nice for them to take care of GIL.
Whatever, he should have been disbarred two years ago.
Only 2? I'd add a zero to that number.
I can't argue there, I think he should have been stopped in law school, but it's an imperfect world.

bob,
So I then take it it is an "extraordinary situation" when GIL is ignored, thus warranting a mandamus?


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: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2293

Post by bob » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:48 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:44 am
So I then take it it is an "extraordinary situation" when GIL is ignored, thus warranting a mandamus?
In GIL's mind . . . sure.

The real world, not so much.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 8734
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2294

Post by Notorial Dissent » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:55 am

bob wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:48 am
Notorial Dissent wrote:
Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:44 am
So I then take it it is an "extraordinary situation" when GIL is ignored, thus warranting a mandamus?
In GIL's mind . . . sure.

The real world, not so much.
:yeah: :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
Orlylicious
Posts: 6502
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2295

Post by Orlylicious » Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:42 am

In the new no tolerance world, most people don't know GIL's sordid history with his own children... if we brought the allegations to light might he be shunned in disgrace? Just a thought.


From Michael Moore: RESISTANCE CALENDAR! A one-stop site for all anti-Trump actions EVERY DAY nationwide: http://resistancecalendar.org

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2296

Post by bob » Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:29 am

Orlylicious wrote:
Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:42 am
In the new no tolerance world, most people don't know GIL's sordid history with his own children... if we brought the allegations to light might he be shunned in disgrace?
A laudable endeavor. But no one really cares about Klayman.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41216
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Re: Larry Klayman

#2297

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:40 am

Did some of his alleged misconduct occur while bathing his children? If so, should we rename him Bathtub Larry?



User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2298

Post by bob » Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:31 pm

WND: ARE ALL FEMALE ACCUSERS TO BE BELIEVED?:
Exclusive: Larry Klayman sees women as 'protected species' too often not held accountable

* * *

The hard reality is that there are plenty of legitimate claims by women about sexual harassment and abuse, but there also are multitudes of false claims conjured up by women to strike back at men. This occurs frequently, for example, in our corrupt and compromised family courts, where sleazy divorce and child custody lawyers, to win judgments for their female clients, conspire with them to make false claims that the husband sexually abused or molested his own children. And, statistics show that in about 90 percent of all such cases, these claims were manufactured for strategic reasons. What happens when these women are exposed as having borne false witness against their estranged husbands? The answer is nothing. They just walk off into the sunset with no legal repercussions.

* * *

In many of these cases, the aggrieved men live with the stigma of these false claims for the rest of their lives, and some, given the severe emotional distress, have even gone to the length of committing suicide, as their children and society had become alienated from them. But despite this, the women who made these claims generally couldn’t care less and just go on their merry way in life.

* * *

And, when either a man or a woman testifies and gives false witness to sexual or child abuse allegations that have been strategically conjured up for political, family law or other improper purposes, these false accusers should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Neither gender is above the law, plain and simple. And, even more importantly, we both are clearly equal in God’s eyes.
Klayman's position has and always will be that he was falsely accused by his ex-wife. To the point that Klayman has (unsuccessfully) sued newspapers for reporting on his court case. In addition to suing the judge that made the ruling about Klayman.

So I, personally, see little upside to poking Klayman about this, and much downside.

* * *

And, of course, because Klayman can't stop Klaymaning:
Even my favorite judge, the Honorable Royce C. Lamberth, would never allow me to take the deposition of Hillary Clinton in the famous Filegate lawsuit I brought while I was running Judicial Watch. In that case, Hillary was the lead defendant, having illegally ordered up the FBI files on over 900 persons she considered adversaries, to dig up dirt and then smear them. Judge Lamberth, who is a Southern gentlemen, could never summon up the stomach to have me put her under oath, even when it was shown that she not only illegally obtained FBI files, but also hid key evidence as part of the Wicked Witch’s first email scandal.

In this regard, in the late 1990s, thanks to two White House whistleblowers, we learned that over 1 million emails were allegedly “lost” on the server of the White House Office of Administration, likely containing proof of the then-first lady’s and her husband’s crimes. While Judge Lamberth allowed me to conduct a criminal contempt hearing, Hillary was left out of the witness mix, and I was prohibited from even deposing her generally in the case.

Despite this, I do not want to give you the impression that I do not appreciate all the judge did and continues to do to further some integrity in our broken and corrupt system of justice. He is a shining star of judicial integrity and courage – and to be frank, I love the guy. Since I left Judicial Watch and have had the chance to get to know Judge Lamberth even better, as I have not had cases before him, I can’t tell you how much I have come to admire him even more. But with Hillary, he could not pull the trigger.


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2299

Post by bob » Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:11 pm

Klayman posts the schedule to find his radio show.

About 35 stations; that's a fair amount of pennies. :think:


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 22241
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#2300

Post by bob » Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:54 pm

Law360: Judicial Watch Founder Fights Sanctions For Suits Vs. Org:
Former Judicial Watch general counsel Larry Klayman protested recommended sanctions in an oral hearing before a D.C. Court of Appeals ethics board Thursday, arguing his past work for the nonprofit did not create conflicts of interest in three lawsuits in which Klayman helped sue the organization he once founded.
(The rest of the article is behind a paywall.)


Imagex4 Imagex2 Imagex2 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”