#Revote2017 SCOTUS Fail: In Re Diane Blumstein Writ of Mandamus 16-907 & Fail #2 Bailey v U.S., 16-1464 #NullifyNow

Post Reply
User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

#Revote2017 SCOTUS Fail: In Re Diane Blumstein Writ of Mandamus 16-907 & Fail #2 Bailey v U.S., 16-1464 #NullifyNow

#1

Post by Orlylicious » Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:25 pm

Posted this originally in a Donald topic but it's so popular on Twitter with thousands of retweets and people getting their hopes up it seems like a good idea to bring it here for feedback. This EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS is docketed at SCOTUS: https://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.asp ... 16-907.htm

The objection to this is that they are raising money on GoFundMe from innocent people who have no idea how moot and futile this case is. The Organizers have been made well aware of the defects and impossibility of this (among other things, a president can only be removed from office through impeachment and conviction), yet they keep raising money (over $24,000 as of 2/19). That's just wrong without letting people know there is no chance of success and it's a symbolic donation. GoFundMe is here: and to report the campaign for fraud, the report link is here: https://www.gofundme.com/mvc.php?route= ... paign_Page
No. 16-907
Title:
In Re Diane Blumstein, et al., Petitioners
v.
Docketed: January 19, 2017

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jan 18 2017 Petition for a writ of mandamus filed. (Response due February 21, 2017)


~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioners:
Diane Blumstein 276 Chestnut Hill Ave., Apt 11 (587) 928-2094
Brighton, MA 02135
Party name:

Nancy Goodman 12 Caleb's Lane (978) 290-0702
Rockport, MA 01966
Party name:

Donna Soodalter-Toman 30 Starknaught Heights (617) 447-7527


Learned about the case from this highly retweeted post:



The Petition is here: http://progressivearmy.com/wp-content/u ... ndamus.pdf

Image
Image

It's about the election being thrown because of Russian hacking. But this is the Relief requested:



The 1st Circuit denied it so that's how they went to SCOTUS:
Image

Isn't it moot and will be denied? The relief requested is to not inaugurate Donald. No response was filed but would there even be on a Petition like this? Lots of people are excited in the topic but if it's moot they should work on things that count.

After we discussed it briefly, I kept trying to tell them it's moot and not to waste time on it but they won't believe me. I bet Dr. Kelly $100 to the ACLU she's wrong. This Dr. Kelly seems to be a contact point, we're following each other and I DMed her... but now she just announced it's not moot. Now they're all tweeting that. I hate see people waste time when there's so much to do.
Here's her Twitter: https://twitter.com/MtnMD


Here's her comment:



In light of so many people following this on Twitter, thought it was appropriate to bring it up here as a place to link to for well meaning and good hearted people to learn what's really going on with this case. Would appreciate your thoughts and opinions.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 10393
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#2

Post by Mikedunford » Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:43 pm

This case is at SCOTUS the same way most of the birther cases got there - as a cert petition that will be rejected without comment or response in the near future.

It is moot, and that is probably the least of its issues. It's a mandamus case, and mandamus is not an appropriate action. (For mandamus to work, an official has to have a clear, mandatory duty to do something specific.) Standing is probably an issue, possibly on every prong of the inquiry. (Personal injury not generalized grievance; causation; redressability.)

I might have a little time later to give more detail, that's just what I can come up with on the predawn hours while waiting for the dog to take care of whatever it was that was so urgent that he had to wake me up.
"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
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#3

Post by Orlylicious » Sun Feb 05, 2017 10:52 pm

Thank you Mike, I'll point that out and link to the topic. These cases are complicated and people have only the best intentions but Dr. Kelly is getting a lot of hopes up. A great reason for The Fogbow to help out.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26641
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#4

Post by bob » Sun Feb 05, 2017 11:58 pm

After we discussed it briefly, I kept trying to tell them it's moot and not to waste time on it but they won't believe me. I bet Dr. Kelly $100 to the ACLU she's wrong.
It is moot. However, the inevitable denial will not specify that it was denied as moot -- the petition will just be denied. (And to the extent that any portion isn't moot, it'll be just be denied for a variety of reasons that also won't be specified.)

This is birther-level hope (and abuse of the judicial system). I don't think there is anything that can be said now that will convey the fruitlessness of the misdirected energy. Some people (including many birthers) believe doing something futile is better than doing nothing.


And, as is it sometimes said in parts around here, no one ever says, "Thank you for debunking me."
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15543
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#5

Post by Reality Check » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:20 am

Deja vu all over again. We've seen this movie before.
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#6

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:36 am

The opinions are really helpful, many of the people retweeting have no experience with this and are trying to understand what this means. Don't know the motivations of the filers, but people on Twitter are confused and are seeking information about what this means.

I remember when I first saw SCOTUS dockets it seemed exciting... even recently Rachel Maddow was touting something docketed that we all knew was going nowhere (can't remember what exactly right now). Many of the people I'm hearing from are people of goodwill who genuinely believe Russia swung the election and frustrated by Donald. For example:

Citizens Fed Up ‏@CitizensFedUp 48m48 minutes ago
@Orly_licious I am not confident in this but am inquisitive about it
There is a lack of info = no good

So I've been trying to help set the record straight and appreciate any thoughts and comments that I can relay to help people understand how this works and why they shouldn't get their hopes up. Thanks again!
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15543
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#7

Post by Reality Check » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:55 am

I suppose you just have to tell them that the federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and unless the Constitution gives the courts the authority to provide a remedy for what the plaintiffs are seeking the case will not move forward. The federal courts cannot order a new election. Impeachment and conviction is the only remedy other than an event that makes Trump unable to serve.
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#8

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 1:11 am

Just got a reply from Dr. Kelly, unfortunately I don't think she understands how SCOTUS works and I tried to point that out. I'm not trying to give them headwinds, just the facts.
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#9

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:40 am

Aww just saw an update, they are raising money for this, guess should have known.

Image


Here's an update on it:
UPDATE ON SCOTUS CASE TO NULLIFY ELECTION
Posted on 02/04/2017 by Analysis and Discourse

A heartfelt thank you to all who are spreading the word this weekend and to those who have contributed. We are far behind in contributions, so that is gratefully accepted!

I want to update last 24 hours:

We have several top level lawyers conversing with us. They have said that although our writ is obviously written (poorly? by a layperson and requires some “filling in” (to say the least!!), the argument itself is sound. We are meeting with lawyers all weekend to respectfully improve and to perfect what we have done so that the Supreme Court justices can feel confident ruling on our writ. We want to present as legible and accurate of an argument for them as we can. We are in deep respect for our justices (unlike the opinion of our “so called president” and the GOP congress) and honor the desire to have a competent and accurate argument for them. We want to follow the constitution and the will of the people.

The basis of our argument is that the federal government is tasked in our constitution with the job to keep states safe from foreign invasion. Since our election was invaded by a foreign nation, we do not ask the court to remedy this, as that is a political remedy per historical adjudication and noted to be non-judicable. What we DO ask is that they make a finding of fact that our election was tainted by foreign invasion and is therefore, nullified.

WHAT WE NEED NOW:

1. Continue to tweet and call top celebrities. We are only regular citizens and require immediate and rapid dissemination of this information. These special celebrities have the ability to maximize delivery of this information to the masses, that a revote is “LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE AND MORALLY MANDATED”. And, that this needs to happen now, through legitimate court functions. BIG PUSH for this weekend, thank you! Tweet, call, network this hard, now.
More: https://analysisanddiscourse.com/2017/0 ... -election/
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 10393
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#10

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Feb 06, 2017 2:51 am

She has a gofundme with a $35k goal linked from her Twitter profile. She deserves headwind.
"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
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#11

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 3:03 am

Totally agree and need to get that word out, the blog post shows only wishful thinking at best. @ACLU if they want to donate.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#12

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:55 am

I'm not sure what this means but none of it seems possible.
LadyB ‏@LadyBs_Inn 5m 5 minutes ago
@Orly_licious @Truth_Wins @mmpadellan @CitizensFedUp @questauthority I guess refile,edited, Mand &/or Prohib per relief sought. Ct.Rule 20.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12211
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#13

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Feb 06, 2017 7:36 am

I see several problems with this whole farce. Not the least is that they filed it as a Mandamus, when there is NO ONE that the Mandamus can be issued to. Next, there is no law or constitutional provision that allows for anything they are asking for. I don't see that there is any way they can show standing of any kind. So that is at least three or is it four fatal flaws just off the top of my head.

I also have a tremendously hard time believing that a "top lawyer" or "top lawyers", let alone an assoc prof at Memphis law school looked at or had anything even remotely to do with this. If this was the handy work of a real lawyer, they should be embarrassed and/or disbarred for a number of very good reasons. At the very least they should have told them that this WASN'T GOING TO FLY and why, and I just don't think that happened. I will say, that if there were real lawyers involved, they got paid what their work was worth. This is just flat out embarrassing, on top of being a waste of time, effort, and money.
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: 34767
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#14

Post by realist » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:59 am

I just popped in to the FB page and noticed how eerily similar their writing and spreading of hope to the gullible is to what the birthers did in their writing and fundraising.

Sadly, there is over 7k in the gofundme account. I know people can do what they wish with their money, but it's sad to see it go to a place where the promises (no matter how well-intentioned their motives) are not going to come to fruition. :(
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

noblepa
Posts: 1050
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Network Engineer

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#15

Post by noblepa » Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:10 am

Even if there were something to this, it seems to me that the Russians didn't hack the vote counting systems in the various states and cause them to misrepresent the actual vote. What they did was hack into DNC computers and release information that was embarrassing or detrimental to HRC.

If there were a revote (which won't happen), that information is still out there. Even in light of the Donald's actions as POTUS so far, would the voters opinion of HRC be much different.

As much as I hate to admit it, the election result was legitimate. Donald won the electoral votes he needed. The campaign, on the other hand . . .

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#16

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 11:52 am

People are reading and listening to the comments here and it's helping, they're understanding better that this isn't going anywhere. I don't think the intention is evil like birthers, but the filers were/are totally unrealistic. Now people are getting to see the truth from people with experience. The Fogbow once again helps clear up misconceptions, it's an amazing place.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
bob
Posts: 26641
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#17

Post by bob » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:14 pm

Headwind is most definitely deserved if they're diverting money away from useful causes (and into their own pockets).

And I distrust anyone who touts unnamed authority.
Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 28195
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#18

Post by Foggy » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:16 pm

When your strategy includes "tweet and call big celebrities," you have a problem.

User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 7916
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Trouble's Howse

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#19

Post by Estiveo » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:33 pm

Foggy wrote:When your strategy includes "tweet and call big celebrities," you have a problem.
Really. Don't they know that YouTubing and sending sheriffs kits is the only effective strategery?
Image Image Image Image Image

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 7873
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#20

Post by RoadScholar » Mon Feb 06, 2017 12:54 pm

Sadly, the Constitution doesn't say anything about "do-overs." Only Impeachment. So yeah, waste of time and money.
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 10393
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#21

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Feb 06, 2017 3:20 pm

I'm wondering where "crowdfunding a frivolous pro se lawsuit" falls on the unauthorized practice of law spectrum. I'm fairly sure I couldn't collect money for a lawsuit in that manner - even if proceeding pro se - without running into substantial ethical issues - starting with, but by no means limited to, whether funders become clients for the purpose of the applicable professional responsibility rules. Big ass can-o-worms.
"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: 10393
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#22

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Feb 06, 2017 3:25 pm

Just collected my first Twitter block - that I know of, anyway.
"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
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#23

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 6:47 pm

Mike, I was wondering the same thing... I know the GoFundMe guys, if you think it's unethical I can reach out to them, I agree it seems really sketchy.

And yes on those blocks, that makes it even more suspicious. I've been giving the link to this topic so the well meaning people can follow this and know they are being conned. Haven't had time to look today but many have written saying thank you, they were going to contribute and now they'll send to ACLU.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#24

Post by Orlylicious » Mon Feb 06, 2017 9:42 pm

Wow now this is over $18,000, what a scam. That money could do so much good!

Tweeted this:
Beware: GoFundMe for 16-907 In Re Diane Blumstein, et al is MOOT case that will be denied. Don't waste your money!

Image
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 9227
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA

Re: In Re Diane Blumstein, et al. Petition for a Writ of Mandamus - New Election

#25

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Feb 07, 2017 1:55 pm

People are starting to get the word out about this bogus GoFundMe and that's thanks to everybody's help here.
Moot Scotus.PNG
Reported to GoFundMe and we're emailing, they'll probably take a look here.
GoFundMe Complaint.PNG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Avatar Photo: Current Logo for Fogbow's favorite show, "Mama June: From Not To Hot: "The Road To Intervention"

Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”