Mario Apuzzo

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 6789
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2176

Post by Sam the Centipede » Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:26 pm

bob wrote:
Mario Apuzzo wrote: :snippity: As constitutionally conceived, the Electoral College is free to vote any way it wants. The Electoral College should follow the “sense of the people” which has spoken on election day. The reason that these Republican electors are given the opportunity to elect the next President is that the people who voted for them expect them to vote for the person for whom they voted. That means that the Republican electors are expected to vote for Donald Trump.
That's one of Apuzzo's fastest contradictions.
I don't speak Italian but it would not surprise me to discover that "apuzzo" translates as "flatulent hypocrite".



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16560
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2177

Post by Suranis » Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:34 pm

http://names.mooseroots.com/l/65299/Apuzzo
Apuzzo Surname
Origin of Name: Italian
Meaning: Bee
Number of Syllables: 3
Number of Letters: 6


Meaning and Origin
Southern Italian (Campania): from a derivative of Italian ape ‘bee’, Sicilian apa, hence an occupational name for a bee keeper or a nickname for an industrious person.

Associated Given Names: Italian 16%; French 4%. Salvatore, Franco, Cosmo, Dino, Ferdinando, Pasquale, Remo; Alphonse, Luc.

Source: The Dictionary of American Family Names © 2006, Patrick Hanks
That explains the excessive droning on...


Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2178

Post by bob » Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:01 pm

P&E: Judge on Trump’s “Short List” for U.S. Supreme Court Labeled Obama Eligibility Case “Frivolous”:

* * *

The remaining two judges [on the president's short list] are Thomas M. Hardiman of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia and William H. Pryor, Jr. of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta, GA.

* * *

On Friday, The Post & Email spoke with New Jersey-based attorney Mario Apuzzo, who represented CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr. (Ret) and three other plaintiffs in challenging the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama on January 20, 2009, the day he took office.


* * *

On Friday, Apuzzo recounted that Hardiman voted in agreement with two other judges to deem his appeal [in Kerchner] on the issue of standing “frivolous,” when neither the lower court nor opposing counsel had argued that the plaintiffs’ position on what gave them standing was frivolous, and to suggest the imposition of financial sanctions for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by defendants in a July 2, 2010 Order to Show Cause.

Of the Third Circuit’s opinion and suggested sanctions against him, Apuzzo told us [soooo much; it's at the link if you want to reread the same bloviatious :yankyank: that Apuzzo has been spewing for literally years.]

More of The Post & Email’s interview with Apuzzo will be published in a subsequent article in the near future.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 1849
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2179

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:55 pm

Question to all lawyers: Would taking clients' money to repeatedly present already debunked arguments merit discipline from your State Bar Association?



User avatar
bob
Posts: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2180

Post by bob » Sun Feb 05, 2017 6:12 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:Question to all lawyers: Would taking clients' money to repeatedly present already debunked arguments merit discipline from your State Bar Association?
Possibly, but no one paid Apuzzo.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43925
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2181

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:56 pm

bob wrote:
Grumpy Old Guy wrote:Question to all lawyers: Would taking clients' money to repeatedly present already debunked arguments merit discipline from your State Bar Association?
Possibly, but no one paid Apuzzo.
He'd have better luck getting paid to STFU. Bloviating pissant.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 11698
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2182

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Feb 05, 2017 9:32 pm

Rharon can't even make sense when she is copying someone else.


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: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2183

Post by bob » Thu Feb 09, 2017 7:21 pm

P&E wrote:More of The Post & Email’s interview with Apuzzo will be published in a subsequent article in the near future.
BECAUSE THE CROWD DEMANDS IT: P&E: Eligibility Attorney: An Image on a Computer Screen Does not Satisfy “Rules of Evidence”:
“YOU HAVE TO AUTHENTICATE A DOCUMENT”

* * *

Apuzzo told The Post & Email that the “frivolous” label has remained in place and that the three-judge panel sullied his professional reputation by truncating New Jersey Rule of Professional Conduct 3.3(a)(3).

“They put this tarnish on me, which is a written opinion of the Third Circuit, and I explained to them that this was totally improper and they should write a corrected opinion. They cut off the words ‘…and not disclosed by opposing counsel,’ suggesting that I committed a violation,” Apuzzo said.

In his 95-page reply brief to the court, Apuzzo argued that the suit broke new ground in regard to determining who has standing in the matter of presidential eligibility. . . . And the Berg case was totally different.

“They threw all of this at me: that the case was frivolous, that I should have known there was no standing, and that I committed some kind of ethical violation.”

During our interview, Apuzzo said that Obama’s attorneys could have entered the birth certificate into evidence to avoid or settle aspects of litigation over his eligibility. “On the issue of whether or not Obama was born in the United States, all they had to do was provide a birth certificate,” Apuzzo said. “During the first case that was argued, that is all they needed to do. It would have been collateral estoppel, which means that the issue has already been decided.”

He continued . . . .
(Much) more :yankyank: at the link. However:
Apuzzo wrote:I”m not saying that Obama can’t authenticate his document; we’ve never seen anything in court. We’ve seen only what’s on the computer. Nobody ever came to court and testified that what’s on that computer is indeed what’s in the archives in Hawaii.
Apuzzo has been repeatedly told that the birth certificate was entered into the records of various cases. (Apuzzo also continues to be completely unfamiliar with the evidentiary rules regarding self-authenticating documents, but that's not new.)


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2184

Post by bob » Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:37 pm

Apuzzo has been really quiet lately, silently approving the occasional comment on his blog, but not haunting comment sections like some of the few remaining dead-enders. Apuzzo did recently comment on his own blog; n.b.:
Apuzzo wrote:Too bad that Mark Levin has not accepted my acceptance of his challenge that he expressed on his radio show to millions across the globe that he is willing to debate any attorney, authority, or scholar on the meaning of a natural born citizen and whether Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen under that definition. He says that Cruz is and I say he is not. If not on his radio show, maybe he would accept doing the debate on his television channel. We can do it at a college or university. I think the College of William and Mary would be a great place to do it, assuming the college would allow it. If not, we can find another college or university.
"For the record," Levin said that he would debate a "so-called legal scholar, professor, serious commentator, or candidate."

It should come as no surprise that Levin would view the likes of Apuzzo as something other than a legal scholar or serious commentator. It should also come as no surprise that Apuzzo desperately would like to be taken seriously.

In any event, I don't think anyone (besides birthers) have given much thought to Cruz's eligibility since May of 2016. Sad birthers -- perpetually stuck in the past.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43925
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2185

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:56 pm

I'm available. :mememe:



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 11698
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2186

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:13 pm

But..but... aren't Putzi and la Taitz world renowned legul skolars, perfessers, serious komentaturs, and failed candidates??????

Shurly one of them would qualify????? :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: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2187

Post by bob » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:01 pm

Apuzzo, perhaps finally realizing the popularity of "Hamilton," pens two comments about the citizenship of the Marquis de Lafayette. :yawn:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 11698
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2188

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:29 pm

As usual, Putzi blathers on with no real foundation for his blathering. His PutzilogicTM makes my heard hurt every time I encounter it.


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
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6999
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2189

Post by Slartibartfast » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:32 pm

One of my favorite natural born citizens is the descendant of the Marquis who successfully sued to become a member of the New York bar based on the citizenship granted to Lafayette and all of his male descendants. I think his name was Chapman or something similar. How does Mario think Lafayette's citizenship helps his arguments? (I'm not clicking the link and jumping on that slippery slope :towel: )


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6999
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2190

Post by Slartibartfast » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:39 pm

Notorial Dissent wrote:As usual, Putzi blathers on with no real foundation for his blathering. His PutzilogicTM makes my heard hurt every time I encounter it.
You just have to get the rhythm of it. Mario is so predictable he almost uses the same logical fallacies in the same order every time. Any Apuzzocomment is going to be built around a false equivalence/analogy that makes extensive use of misrepresentation and cherry picking and, when he's really feeling his oats, he will blatantly and unapologetically abuse formal logic. And then he'll do it all over again. I guess that at least he's got more stamina than most of the birthers.
:roll:


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 11698
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2191

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:44 pm

Eggzactly, and eggzactly what he did. He's easy, if painful to follow, still makes my head hurt. Executive summary, natural born doesn't mean natural born unless Putzi says it does, and he doesn't with MdeL, apparently MD didn't know what they were doing when they declared him and his male descendants NBC. He still can't do Vatel right either, but that is no surprise.


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: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2192

Post by bob » Mon Jun 12, 2017 5:09 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:How does Mario think Lafayette's citizenship helps his arguments?
Executive summary: Lafayette was a natural-born citizen due to the grace of the grandfather clause, i.e., his citizenship was granted before ratification. If Lafayette's citizenship grant occurred post-ratification, he would have been considered only a naturalized citizen.

Ergo, Apuzzo wins again. :roll:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6999
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2193

Post by Slartibartfast » Mon Jun 12, 2017 5:22 pm

Wow! That is nothing, like we've seen before! I guess I should have mentioned "special pleading" as one of Mario's go-to tropes.
:towel:

Thanks Bob & ND!


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27873
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2194

Post by Foggy » Mon Jun 12, 2017 7:24 pm

Twenty years from now, Apuzzo will still be sitting in his room that he uses as an office in the home he owns, turning out illogical and nonfactual screeds that nobody reads and nobody cares about, clinging to the forlorn hope that somehow, some day, someone will realize he was right all along. After being shown that he is full of shit by literally dozens of better attorneys, he now hides in his pathetic little hole, hoping against hope that eventually, he'll be vindicated and triumphant.

To me, he's the saddest of the last few birthers. Fitzfundfilcher, Rondeau, Volin, and Judy have each other, at least. But none of them ever talk to Apuzzo or acknowledge his existence. None of them cite his never-ending stream of horseshit as meaningful. Nobody cares about him at all.

:violin: :crying:

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, too. :mrgreen:


Momma said there'd be days like this,
There'd be days like this, my momma said!

boots
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2195

Post by boots » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:16 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:Question to all lawyers: Would taking clients' money to repeatedly present already debunked arguments merit discipline from your State Bar Association?
Possibly. In my experience it is rare but have run into a couple of lawyers who were, for example, sanctioned or who got disciplined over filing meritless papers.



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 11698
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2196

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jun 12, 2017 8:22 pm

Putzi is, and has been for as long as I've known of him, for relevance and respect, and those horses have long ago left the barn and he is now reduced to riding ridicule and rejection.


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: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2197

Post by bob » Wed Jun 14, 2017 11:45 am

Oh noes! "Unknown" has provoked Apuzzo into discussing whether Maryland's (when granting Lafayette (and his male descendants) citizenship) "deemed, adjudged, and taken to be, natural born citizens of this state" has any bearing on the first Congress' "shall be considered as" in the Naturalization Act of 1790.
:panic:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34684
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2198

Post by realist » Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:19 pm

bob wrote:Oh noes! "Unknown" has provoked Apuzzo into discussing whether Maryland's (when granting Lafayette (and his male descendants) citizenship) "deemed, adjudged, and taken to be, natural born citizens of this state" has any bearing on the first Congress' "shall be considered as" in the Naturalization Act of 1790.
:panic:
:rotflmao:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16560
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2199

Post by Suranis » Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:31 pm

You can stop whenever you want, Bob.


Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26099
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Mario Apuzzo

#2200

Post by bob » Wed Jun 14, 2017 12:38 pm

Suranis wrote:You can stop whenever you want, Bob.
:fingerwag: I am not presently trolling Apuzzo on his blog.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Post Reply

Return to “Lesser Lights”