Fogbow

BONUS: Back on Fogbow 1, we followed the crazy case of Shiva v Galvin (Massachusetts), where Shiva ultimately tried to tie Twitter into his mess. That case was Ayyadurai v Galvin and the docket is here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18 ... er_by=desc. Incredibly patient Judge Wolf tried to help this idiot by allowing the court to pay for a lawyer to argue his claim that Twitter was acting in concert with the government. It was a bogus argument; all states have access to a special portal to report election disinformation, but still. Shiva screwed that up too also.

This is an example of his lunatic style: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... .181.1.pdf

And after all the crying, all the screaming... a few days after a sealed videoconference call, the great and mighty Shiva...

Luke wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 5:57 amAnd after all the crying, all the screaming... a few days after a sealed videoconference call, the great and mighty Shiva...

I've had more than one Ayyadurai cultist tell me that he won that lawsuit. I'm like, "LOL; the public docket shows otherwise." Often followed by the unsubstantiated claim of a sekrit settlement.

CourtListener glitched.

Ayyadurai sued (essentially) the federal government and the DC election board.

The DC election board moved to dismiss.

The federal government asked for more time to respond.

The court ordered the feds to respond (read: file its dismissal motion) by February 20. Once that is filed, the court will consider the dismissal motions together.

Shiva has it in for RFK. It would appear.

Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD. Inventor of Email @va_shiva wrote: Booby F’n Kennedy has NO balls - they’ve shrunk from TRT therapy and sucking ZIONIST cock.

Ryan Wong @RyanWong87913 wrote: I would love to see if RFK have a balls to debate with Dr Shiva face to face, and live publicly, not pre-recorded.

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 11:57 am Shiva has it in for RFK. It would appear.

Yeah; they're both in the same lane, trying to grift off the same set of idiots.

The irony being, while neither will win, Ayyadurai cannot win (he's ineligible).

Ayyadurai has been hustling for like a year now, and he's netted only $37k.

Beats working?

No surprise: the DDC dismissed Ayyaurai's lawsuit. (His Klayman-esque lawfare as publicity to get on a ballot, or something.)

It isn't on courtlistener ... yet.

Our old friend Iqbal makes an appearance.

It isn't on courtlistener ... yet.

The court's ruling now is online.

An interesting nugget:

DDC* [citations omitted] wrote:With regard to nationwide ballot access, Dr. Ayyadurai argues that he has suffered an injury in fact because Utah and Wyoming have asked him to confirm that he is a natural born citizen as part of their ballot-access process. However, he does not allege that either state has made a definitive decision that he is ineligible to run for President. Unless and until that happens, Dr. Ayyadurai has not suffered a sufficiently concrete injury to confer standing. But even if Utah or Wyoming did render an unfavorable decision on his eligibility, the court would still lack standing because Dr. Ayyadurai has not alleged any causal connection between those decisions and any actions by DOJ.

* Judge AliKhan, a Biden nominee confirmed in December, on a 51-50 vote.

... the court would still lack standing ...

Ahem.

bob wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 6:11 pm The court's ruling now is online.

An interesting nugget:

DDC* [citations omitted] wrote:With regard to nationwide ballot access, Dr. Ayyadurai argues that he has suffered an injury in fact because Utah and Wyoming have asked him to confirm that he is a natural born citizen as part of their ballot-access process. However, he does not allege that either state has made a definitive decision that he is ineligible to run for President. Unless and until that happens, Dr. Ayyadurai has not suffered a sufficiently concrete injury to confer standing. But even if Utah or Wyoming did render an unfavorable decision on his eligibility, the court would still lack standing because Dr. Ayyadurai has not alleged any causal connection between those decisions and any actions by DOJ.

* Judge AliKhan, a Biden nominee confirmed in December, on a 51-50 vote.

Have the states of Utah and Wyoming proffered a definition of NBC by which they will judge his eligibility? It seems to me that, if they try to enforce DeVattel's definition, they run the risk of being accused of attempting to add to the requirements for the presidency that are stated in the Constitution. This is the reason that courts have struck down term limits for Congress critters and Senators.

And what kind of proof do they need? A copy of his birth certificate? Copies of his parents BC's or Naturalization papers?

Then too, if they haven't asked other candidates for such proof of eligibility, it seems to me that there is an equal protection problem.

noblepa wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 12:37 pm Have the states of Utah and Wyoming proffered a definition of NBC by which they will judge his eligibility?

I don't know, and I don't think so.

It also is irrelevant: Ayyadurai is a naturalized citizen.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Ayyadurai is trying to pull a Uygur and submit paperwork without affirming that he's a natural-born citizen. Like Uygur, Ayyadurai can't do that without committing perjury.

Then too, if they haven't asked other candidates for such proof of eligibility, it seems to me that there is an equal protection problem.

It isn't an equal-protection issue to require all candidates to affirm their eligibility. Or to bounce candidates who won't affirm (or are facially ineligible).

bob wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 3:04 pm

noblepa wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 12:37 pm Have the states of Utah and Wyoming proffered a definition of NBC by which they will judge his eligibility?

I don't know, and I don't think so.

It also is irrelevant: Ayyadurai is a naturalized citizen.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like Ayyadurai is trying to pull a Uygur and submit paperwork without affirming that he's a natural-born citizen. Like Uygur, Ayyadurai can't do that without committing perjury.

Then too, if they haven't asked other candidates for such proof of eligibility, it seems to me that there is an equal protection problem.

It isn't an equal-protection issue to require all candidates to affirm their eligibility. Or to bounce candidates who won't affirm (or are facially ineligible).

Well, "we" let Obama run and he wasn't "natural born" /sarcasm

No surprise: the DDC dismissed Ayyaurai's lawsuit.

Grifter gotta, so Ayyadurai filed a NOA.

Given that Ayyadurai is pro per, I expect a dismissal (as moot) from the D.C. Cir. early next year.

Some jerk* made Bad Legal Takes (sorta)!:



*