Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

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:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#276

Post by Kriselda Gray » Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:54 am

It seems to me that someone who is so concerned with whether or not the President is able to give lawful orders to the military would possibly have questioned Bush's fitness to be CiC given the evidence indicating he may have been AWOL for most of his TANG "service" (I use the term loosely.) It may not have been enough to render him ineligible to be President, but to a *true* patriot, you'd think he'd at the very least demand that it be looking into as well. IF, of course, that were actually his primary concern.


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
Highlands
Posts: 3600
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:19 am
Location: 3rd Rock From the Sun

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#277

Post by Highlands » Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:15 pm

Why do I suddenly expect Obama to be in chaps and a cowboy hat?Not that the above would necessarily be a bad thing. ;;) \ :D /


If you took out all of the blood vessels in your body and lined them up, you would be dead. #science

User avatar
Addie
Posts: 23016
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#278

Post by Addie » Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:19 pm

http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa28 ... ama.jpgNot that the above would necessarily be a bad thing. ;;) \ :D /


¡Qué vergüenza!

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 14350
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#279

Post by Reality Check » Tue Jun 01, 2010 12:58 pm

Will the court just ignore this idiocy or is Hemenway headed for more than just a reprimand this time? It seems to this non-lawyer that accusing a federal judge of being biased is kind of a big deal.


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

Heather Heyer, November 2016

Jay Bea
Posts: 715
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:06 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#280

Post by Jay Bea » Tue Jun 01, 2010 1:18 pm

Will the court just ignore this idiocy or is Hemenway headed for more than just a reprimand this time? It seems to this non-lawyer that accusing a federal judge of being biased is kind of a big deal.It's hard to believe, but Hemenway is a lawyer. He's also 82 years old, which is why the Judge that he now wants recused cut him some slack by not issuing monetary sanctions.



TexasFilly
Posts: 17199
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#281

Post by TexasFilly » Tue Jun 01, 2010 3:46 pm

Wow, what a hot mess. Hemenway has about as much understanding of rules of evidence and appellate procedure (and substance) as Orly does. If he is, indeed, the "brains" behind the Lakin court martial {SMILIES_PATH}/pray.gif , Leavenworth should be adding an O.D. to its ranks soon.


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill!

User avatar
Dallasite
Posts: 3074
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:38 pm
Location: About 40,000 light years from the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.
Occupation: Senior Scheduling Manager
Chemtrails Program
Human Factors and Behavioral Sciences Division

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#282

Post by Dallasite » Tue Jun 01, 2010 4:22 pm

Take a look at the two letters at the end. They're dating from around 1994 and seem to be Hollister's attempt to find out if Bill Clinton was in office unconstitutionally, or if Clinton was guilty of treason at some point for organizing student protests against Vietnam while at Oxford.Yes. Hemenway referenced that in one of his briefs - something re: how could Robertson question Hollister's sincerity/patriotism when Hollister has been seeking to uphold the Constitution for years, including with prior Democratic presidents. ... ...FIFY


"I drank what?!?!" - Soctates, 399 BC

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31118
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#283

Post by mimi » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:14 pm

[quote name=Gorefan]



User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#284

Post by Tesibria » Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:56 pm

New Docket Entries:





08/23/2010 [link]Open Document,[/link] PER CURIAM ORDER, En Banc, filed [1261905] denying petition for rehearing en banc [1241041-2] Before Judges: Sentelle, Ginsburg, Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, Brown, Griffith and Kavanaugh. [09-5080, 09-5161]08/23/2010 [link]Open Document,[/link] PER CURIAM ORDER filed [1261907] denying petition for rehearing [1241041-3]; It is FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for recusal [1247245-2] be denied to the extent that appellants seek recusal of the above named judges. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to publish [1241042-2] be denied. Before Judges: Henderson, Tatel and Garland. [09-5080, 09-5161]FINALLY links provided...hey, I have a life and a real job too. Also.


Not Tes' delay, realist's. :(


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#285

Post by Tesibria » Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:17 pm

Links soon, hopefully, but ... the orders are short and sweet:





On the PETITION FOR REHEARING:


BEFORE: Sentelle, Chief Judge, and Ginsburg, Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, Brown, Griffith, and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges


O R D E RUpon consideration of the petition for rehearing en banc, and the absence of a request by any member of the court for a vote, it is ORDERED that the petition be denied.On the MOTION FOR RECUSAL & MOTION TO PUBLISH


BEFORE: Henderson, Tatel, and Garland, Circuit Judges





O R D E RUpon consideration of the petition for rehearing, the motion for recusal, and the motion to publish, it is


ORDERED that the petition be denied. It is





FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for recusal be denied to the extent that appellants seek recusal of the above-named judges. Appellants have not demonstrated the court’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned. See 28 U.S.C. § 455(a). To the extent the motion seeks recusal of the district court judge and vacatur of the decisions that are the subject of the petition for rehearing, the motion is denied for the reason given in the court’s judgment of March 22, 2010: Appellants have provided no reasonable basis for questioning the impartiality of the district court judge. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994). Finally, the motion is dismissed as moot insofar as it seeks to remove the district court judge from the underlying civil action inasmuch as the case was terminated in March 2009.





FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to publish be denied. The judgment does not meet the criteria for publication under D.C. Circuit Rule 36(c).


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31118
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#286

Post by mimi » Mon Aug 23, 2010 4:53 pm

Is it finally dead? Or can it be resurrected? Somebody get a wooden stake.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41869
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#287

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:07 pm

Is it finally dead? Or can it be resurrected? Somebody get a wooden stake.Silly question.Sekrit Stuffs!



User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31118
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#288

Post by mimi » Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:51 pm

okay. And thanks. Maybe Ducky can be his PR person and have the Patriots all bombard clerks and get this thing off right. [More sanctions would be a nice touch.]



No Pilikia
Posts: 1195
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 4:59 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#289

Post by No Pilikia » Tue Aug 24, 2010 2:19 am

Is it finally dead? Or can it be resurrected? Somebody get a wooden stake.IANAL but one thing I think I've learned from Birtherism & Orly, is that no lawsuit is ever dead to a delusional Birther. The wooden stake is a great idea mimi but I don't think that would work either.


"The opportunity that Hawaii offered -- to experience a variety of cultures in a climate of mutual respect -- became an integral part of my world view and a basis for the values I hold most dear." Barack Obama, 1999

User avatar
Tesibria
Posts: 4380
Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:02 am
Location: depends on the day.
Contact:

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#290

Post by Tesibria » Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:18 pm

New Docket Entry:09/03/2010 MANDATE ISSUED to Clerk, District Court [09-5080, 09-5161](No link)


“Words are sacred. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones, in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.”― Tom Stoppard
WYE: Arpaio-Melendres-Seattle Operation Timeline | Sectec Astronomy: Dennis Montgomery Timeline

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34170
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#291

Post by realist » Sat Nov 27, 2010 11:37 am

Moved the discussion on the recent Hemenway Petition for Writ of Certiorarihttp://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=5087


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

FUTTHESHUCKUP
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:20 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#292

Post by FUTTHESHUCKUP » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:18 pm

Now it's officialNo. 10-678Title:Gregory S. Hollister, Petitionerv.Barry Soetoro, et al.Docketed: November 23, 2010Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia CircuitCase Nos.: (09-5080)Decision Date: March 22, 2010Rehearing Denied: August 23, 2010~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Nov 22 2010 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 23, 2010)Nov 22 2010 Appendix of Gregory S. Hollister filed. (Volumes I, II, III)Dec 22 2010 Waiver of right of respondents Barry Soetoro, et al. to respond filed.Dec 29 2010 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 14, 2011.Dec 30 2010 Request for recusal received from petitioner.Jan 18 2011 Petition DENIED.[/break1]supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/10-678.htm]http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx ... 10-678.htm



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 41869
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Trump International - Malibu

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#293

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:30 pm

Well that was a surprise.



FUTTHESHUCKUP
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:20 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#294

Post by FUTTHESHUCKUP » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:36 pm

Well that was a surprise.I'm sure it is to some, Sterngard, like those with a non-functioning cerebral cortex for example.



Res Ipsa
Posts: 2134
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:31 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#295

Post by Res Ipsa » Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:13 am

For completeness, of course, a petition for re-hearing was filed, as if the result is going to be any different.Of course, that gets the idjits believing there is some sort of dramatic turn in store:[/break1]freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2684601/posts]http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-cha ... /postsIt's depressing that the knuckle-dragger brigade never understood how stupid the form of action was in this case in the first instance - using interpleader to determine the "owner" of Hollister's hypothetical duty as a thing being held in trust.



User avatar
everalm
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:45 am

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#296

Post by everalm » Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:07 am

DENIED.....How not suprising[/break1]supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030711zor.pdf]http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/cour ... 711zor.pdfpage 11



User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 19106
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#297

Post by TollandRCR » Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:40 am

DENIED.....How not suprising[/break1]supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030711zor.pdf]http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/cour ... 711zor.pdfpage 11The most interesting case on that docket was SMITH, KENNETH L. V. THOMAS, JUSTICE USSC, in which only Justice Kagen was able to make a judgment. Smith is a serial pro se litigator against Federal judges for removal from office on the grounds of "good behavior," which is certainly a reasonable question to be asking about Justice Thomas.


“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: FEMA Camp PI Okanogan, WA 98840

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#298

Post by SueDB » Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:53 am

DENIED.....How not suprising[/break1]supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030711zor.pdf]http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/cour ... 711zor.pdfpage 11The most interesting case on that docket was SMITH, KENNETH L. V. THOMAS, JUSTICE USSC, in which only Justice Kagen was able to make a judgment. Smith is a serial pro se litigator against Federal judges for removal from office on the grounds of "good behavior," which is certainly a reasonable question to be asking about Justice Thomas.This is a case that even Justice Thomas won't get near. He might get Birfer Cooties on him. :-


“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Welsh Dragon
Posts: 2811
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 3:29 pm

Hollister v. Soetoro - Act II - Appeal to D.C. Cir.

#299

Post by Welsh Dragon » Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:39 pm

DENIED.....How not suprising[/break1]supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/030711zor.pdf]http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/cour ... 711zor.pdfpage 11The most interesting case on that docket was SMITH, KENNETH L. V. THOMAS, JUSTICE USSC, in which only Justice Kagen was able to make a judgment. Smith is a serial pro se litigator against Federal judges for removal from office on the grounds of "good behavior," which is certainly a reasonable question to be asking about Justice Thomas.I'd not heard of this guy so I did a bit of googling.Ultimately, Smith's complaints stem from the refusal of the Colorado Bar to admit him because he refused to answer questions on his mental health.( Did someone say "Andy Martin"?) and he's done more than seek removal on grounds of good behaviour, he's made "scurrilous and unfounded" charges of criminal conduct by judges and opposing attorneys (Did someone say "Orly Taitz"). He's not restricted himself to Individual Federal Judges (he's an equal opportunity NJ.) he's sued State judges, the 10th Circuit, the Colorado Supreme Court etc.I assume this present ex-case stems from the denial of cert in one of his cases last year. If it is then I predict his next move will be to sue Justice Kagan for failing to recuse herself because she was Solicitor General at the time (She waived the right to file a response) Now if only he was a birther - he could provide us with years of entertainment.



Post Reply

Return to “Phil Berg”