Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

User avatar
gatsby
Posts: 18444
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: West Egg, Long Island

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#251

Post by gatsby »

I see a correlation between a lack of self-insight and eternal optimism.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 35106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#252

Post by realist »





Nice try Obots but the brain trust at the Big BR is way ahead! http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/12/pr ... t933153004







VeniVidiVici4U 87p · 8 hours ago



Larry knows exactly what he is doing. The judge's ruling was an expected outcome and part of the plan. Any obot that tries to make this seem as a loss in the birther cause is stupid either because they actually believe that it is a loss or that they think they can get away with trying to demoralize patriots.













:lol:





So this was a birther case? Who knew?



](*,)



And I suppose Larry's loss at the Court of Appeal and denial of Cert at SCOTUS will be "a part of the plan" also. Too.



:roll:
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#253

Post by Notorial Dissent »



The height of insults would have been to mail it out the night of oral argument. This judge was kind.



Far too kind in m opinion, appropriate would have been with an hour of the end of the hearing.





So this was a birther case? Who knew? ](*,) And I suppose Larry's loss at the Court of Appeal and denial of Cert at SCOTUS will be "a part of the plan" also. Too. :roll:



:yeah: , too, also.
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: 28015
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#254

Post by bob »

FW: Arpaio and Klayman appeal judge's dismissal of Obama executive action 'amnesty' suit:Confident of Ultimate SuccessYesterday evening, an Obama-appointed federal judge dismissed the lawsuit filed by Larry Klayman, a former Justice Department prosecutor and founder of Freedom Watch, on the eve of Christmas, handing Obama an early Christmas present. (Arpaio v. Obama, 14-cv-1966). The ruling was not unexpected, given the judge's comments in a hearing held last Monday, where evidence and argument was presented in support of Sheriff's Arpaio's motion for a preliminary injunction to freeze the status quo while the court could finally adjudicate the unconstitutionality of the president's executive actions.For the most part, the judge's decision to dismiss is very weak and not based on the law. She primarily found that courts should not rule on the president's unconstitutional executive actions because it is simply a political dispute between him and Congress, and that Sheriff Arpaio did not have standing to sue because he could not show a direct injury from this massive change in the immigration laws.Having reviewed carefully Judge Beryl Howell's ruling, Klayman, Arpaio's lawyer, had this to say:"Judge Howell is clearly wrong in her reasoning and we wasted no time in taking an appeal – only 20 minutes after the ruling was issued. While I respect the judge, she clearly was influenced by her politics, which is pro-Obama. There is no justifiable basis for her decision and I am confident that it will be overturned on appeal – an appeal which is likely to wind up at the Supreme Court. Notwithstanding that the case does present serious questions about the constitutionality of the president's admittedly "emperor-like actions," the Sheriff's office on behalf of the people of Maricopa County do have standing, since they are have already been and continue to be injured by these illegal executive actions. As just one example presented to the court by the Sheriff, criminals who are illegal aliens are being released back onto the streets by Obama's Department of Homeland Security, as a result of Obama's amnesty, and they frequently commit new crimes and wind up back in jail, at great expense to the Sheriff's office. This is clear harm, but the judge chose to downplay it – even though it costs the people of Maricopa County millions of dollars to jail these criminals who should otherwise be deported. In short, we are confident that her ruling will soon be overturned and that this case will proceed to enjoin the president's illegal and unconstitutional actions. President Obama's early Christmas present will have to be given back to the American people, who deserve better during this sacred holiday season."Someone else pointed out the irony of Klayman concluding that the judge was "clearly wrong" -- after Klayman had "reviewed carefully" ... for all of 20 minutes.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#255

Post by ZekeB »

Definite grounds for appeal - taking 20 minutes to decide a case. Especially a Klayman case.
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#256

Post by SueDB »

And the beat goes on.



Obama is still Presiding while Blek and the Immigration Program hums right along.
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
mighty dawg
Posts: 1572
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Pacific NW
Occupation: Professional Bureaucrat

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#257

Post by mighty dawg »

For the record, the MCSO still has not published any information about the immigration lawsuit on it's website: http://www.mcso.org/PressRelease/Default.aspx Frankly, this seems like something Arpaio is just letting Klayman do without getting too involved.
"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be" - Albert Einstein

User avatar
gatsby
Posts: 18444
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: West Egg, Long Island

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#258

Post by gatsby »

Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#259

Post by SueDB »





Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?







Screech and Scratch trying to play lawyer. Who would use the brain cell between them?

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

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7989
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#260

Post by Flatpointhigh »











Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?







Screech and Scratch trying to play lawyer. Who would use the brain cell between them?

:lol: :lol: :lol:







Damn, I'd PAY to see that comedy show

My Name is...
Daffy Duck.. woo hoo!
Cancer broke me

User avatar
gatsby
Posts: 18444
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: West Egg, Long Island

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#261

Post by gatsby »







Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?





Screech and Scratch trying to play lawyer. Who would use the brain cell between them?

:lol: :lol: :lol:



The audio recording would be very entertaining.



-xx

User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 7989
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#262

Post by Flatpointhigh »

:yeah: too

My Name is...
Daffy Duck.. woo hoo!
Cancer broke me

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#263

Post by SueDB »

I could use it to ensure the bugs move next door.
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 46216
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#264

Post by Sterngard Friegen »





Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?







Not really. The Supreme Court takes cases presenting issues of national importance, usually from cases that have been well developed in the trial court. Klayman's case failed on fairly standard standing grounds. Taitz's case will, too.



Klayman's case was decided at the pleading stage and the preliminary injunction motion did not well develop any factual issues, so it's too theoretical for SCOTUS review. Taitz's case is a mess and was a moving train. The record in the case is so poor and confusing that if the case were taken up on appeal it would concentrate solely on practice issues. Since most lawyers know how to practice, the case would only benefit those as incompetent as Taitz -- but who could actually read, comprehend and follow the decision. SCOTUS wouldn't waste its time.

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 10535
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#265

Post by Mikedunford »











Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?







Screech and Scratch trying to play lawyer. Who would use the brain cell between them?

:lol: :lol: :lol:









The /s/ twins.
"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
gatsby
Posts: 18444
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:29 pm
Location: West Egg, Long Island

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#266

Post by gatsby »











Is it theoretically possible that KKKlayman and Taitz could be teamed up in oral arguments before SCOTUS?







Not really. The Supreme Court takes cases presenting issues of national importance, usually from cases that have been well developed in the trial court. Klayman's case failed on fairly standard standing grounds. Taitz's case will, too.



Klayman's case was decided at the pleading stage and the preliminary injunction motion did not well develop any factual issues, so it's too theoretical for SCOTUS review. Taitz's case is a mess and was a moving train. The record in the case is so poor and confusing that if the case were taken up on appeal it would concentrate solely on practice issues. Since most lawyers know how to practice, the case would only benefit those as incompetent as Taitz -- but who could actually read, comprehend and follow the decision. SCOTUS wouldn't waste its time.







Thanks! It would be fun, though.

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 10533
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#267

Post by Chilidog »

Can the government ask to recover legal costs?

Roboe
Posts: 1224
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 8:59 am

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#268

Post by Roboe »





For the record, the MCSO still has not published any information about the immigration lawsuit on it's website: http://www.mcso.org/PressRelease/Default.aspx Frankly, this seems like something Arpaio is just letting Klayman do without getting too involved.







Makes one wonder who actually initiated the lawsuit, Arpaio or Klayman? It's hardly outside the realm of possibilites, that Klayman wanted to pontificate in court over the Executive Action, and went to Arpaio for a vehicle to do so.

User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 7654
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#269

Post by Butterfly Bilderberg »

The United States has already cited the December 23 opinion of Judge Howell in its December 24 brief opposing Texas v. United States. Judge Hanen is now backed into a corner -- he has to write a phenomenal opinion rebutting Judge Howell's well reasoned opinion if he wants to sustain the standing of the 20 states, four governors and one state AG (and Orly).



Of course, it is now easier for him to dismiss both Orly's case and the states' case by citing her precedent.
"Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful."
- Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet

User avatar
Chilidog
Posts: 10533
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 11:36 am

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#270

Post by Chilidog »

Hanen won't care what anyone else says.

He's got the right wing on his side.

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#271

Post by Notorial Dissent »

Nicely put BB.Well, it would certainly be less politically fraught to do the right thing now and curb the nonsense rather than have it all blow back on him from the court of appeals, who, I'm betting, right about this time are I'm betting beginning to feel very uncharitable towards him for all the possible crap litigation they're going to have to deal with in the very near future and all because he was playing politics.I'm betting right about now he is really ruing the day La Taitz darkened his door, unless he is a whole lot dumber than I've been thinking he is. Question to self, wonder if that is possible????
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
rpenner
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Contact:

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#272

Post by rpenner »

Can the government ask to recover legal costs?I am not a lawyer, but I think the Government cannot recover the salaries of the lawyers, but can in some cases recover things like Xerox fees. Since the case never got as far as discovery, there might be less than $200 in non-attorney-fees-costs in the Government ledger.http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_54

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8940
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#273

Post by Northland10 »











For the record, the MCSO still has not published any information about the immigration lawsuit on it's website: http://www.mcso.org/PressRelease/Default.aspx Frankly, this seems like something Arpaio is just letting Klayman do without getting too involved.







Makes one wonder who actually initiated the lawsuit, Arpaio or Klayman? It's hardly outside the realm of possibilites, that Klayman wanted to pontificate in court over the Executive Action, and went to Arpaio for a vehicle to do so.









I've always thought this was Klayman's thing and Arpaio, needing his patented redirection from his other issues, agreed to jump on board. Zullo is no longer much use in the redirect the right winger game.
North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
realist
Posts: 35106
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#274

Post by realist »

It is merely the calm before the universe-shattering news.

Zullo being vewy vewy kwiyet simply means he is crossing all the Ts and dotting all the Is and making double super sure he has all his ebidence sucks in a row and that jurisdiction is not brunt (somewhere) and he has also too been meeting with super sekrit very important VIPs and when the does come forth it will be with all those very important VIPs on board to oust the usurpin' mofo blek president. Or not. Or maybe he's finishing his book, cuz all those others brunt jurisdiction and the bestest he can do is put it out there for all the world to see. Or something.

It is definitely all part of da plan. Cuz he (much like Klayman and Orly) knows exactly what he's doing.

Patience grasshoppers.
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13561
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Arpaio v. Obama Et Al (DC District & Circuit Appeal 14-5325) Klayman Immigration Fail

#275

Post by Notorial Dissent »

the bestest he can do is put it out there for all the world to see. Or something.Or laughed at, which is the more likely result. Or he's still trying to figure out what Plan "c" is since everything else has gone up in smoke. Or he's just skeered and is hiding under his bed hoping that no one will find him any time soon.
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.

Post Reply

Return to “Lesser Lights”