Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

The dregs of birther remainders.

These people are weird, but we like to find out what weird people are doing and thinking. It's a hobby.
Post Reply
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 9552
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#101

Post by Foggy »

Srsly? They let the Zuckerberg comment through moderation? :whistle:
Out from under. :thumbsup:
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14349
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#102

Post by RTH10260 »

When you consider yourself a Facebook clown clone you don't want to offend its founder :lol:
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5596
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#103

Post by northland10 »

bob wrote: Sat Jun 05, 2021 1:39 pm Gibbs' blog: :snippity:
Bonus:
► Show Spoiler
"God, give me the confidence of a mediocre white dude."
With having to both YouTube recordings and many Zoom/Team meetings and liturgies, I have taken great pains to hide the constant clutter that is my small apartment for, if anything, it distracts from the content. I can only figure, without watching, that somehow Gibbs's cluttered closet (and badly displayed flag) backdrop is meant to complement the clutteredness of the content.

Did he tape some cheap warrior poster to the door with duct tape. Who does that after they leave their teenaged years?
101010 :towel:
Baidn
Posts: 231
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:43 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#104

Post by Baidn »

I really cant stand the "constitutionalist" groups. Even if they weren't pretty much to a man RWNJs its just such a useless thing to call yourself. If they were being honest it would mean that they have among the most flexible political views in the world since the constitution is fairly malleable by design between the amendment process and the interpretation power of the SCOTUS. Yet I have yet to find one that says "well the SCOTUS ruled this is constitutional so as a constitutionalist I respect their constitutional power to interpret the law as being so or not" or applying the same thing to the amendment process its pretty 100% "Nope the constitution means what I want it to mean and nothing else." Angry old man rant over :oldman:
"...don't teach a man to fish. He's a grown man and fishings not that hard." Ron Swanson the worlds only good libertarian
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#105

Post by bob »

Foggy wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:41 am Srsly? They let the Zuckerberg comment through moderation? :whistle:
Yeah, but no more after that one. :whistle:

As with other birthers, they only want to hear agreement.

And Gibbs is grifting off their lawsuit; they literally cannot afford to let the marks learn that their suit will go nowhere.

Gibbs in his broadcast basically said he believes judicial review is unconstitutional, which is why ignores judicial rulings. Unless he likes what they say; then he quotes them.

I think he got the memo about his cluttered "office" because I noticed a later video had a patiotc background filter.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#106

Post by noblepa »

bob wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:11 am
Foggy wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:41 am Srsly? They let the Zuckerberg comment through moderation? :whistle:
Yeah, but no more after that one. :whistle:

As with other birthers, they only want to hear agreement.

And Gibbs is grifting off their lawsuit; they literally cannot afford to let the marks learn that their suit will go nowhere.

Gibbs in his broadcast basically said he believes judicial review is unconstitutional, which is why ignores judicial rulings. Unless he likes what they say; then he quotes them.

I think he got the memo about his cluttered "office" because I noticed a later video had a patiotc background filter.

I kinda. sorta get the argument that Judicial Review is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, as a power granted to the courts. I don't agree with the argument, but it is not an irrational argument.

As I understand it, the argument in favor of Judicial Review goes like this: the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. No one disputes this, except the fanatics who insist that God's law (as they interpret it) supersedes the Constitution. The Constitution provides a process to amend itself, when it is deemed necessary, and that process is definitely NOT by ordinary statute.

So, if Congress passes an ordinary statute that contravenes the Constitution, it can't be a valid law.

What would happen, if Judicial Review were not a thing, if the courts, particularly SCOTUS could not strike down a law? There would be no limit to what Congress could do. The Constitution would lose all meaning.

Even the Tenth Amendment, so beloved by RWNJ's, would have not meaning. Who would decide that Congress had usurped a power reserved to the states?

Who would guard against an over-zealous Congress severely limiting gun ownership, or banning it outright, despite the second amendment?

If Judicial Review is not a thing, then the Supremacy clause is meaningless. Without JR, Congress becomes supreme and unchallengeable.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#107

Post by bob »

► Show Spoiler
:shock: :cantlook: :sick:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#108

Post by noblepa »

I wasn't sure where to put this.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lif ... d=msedgntp

Baby Lilibet could grow up to be President of the US, according to this article.

Cue the birthers' outrage in 3, 2, 1...
gshevlin2
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2021 12:32 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#109

Post by gshevlin2 »

Oh, some Birdsite warblers are already claiming she is not eligible. I pointed out that nope, she is indeed eligible. Crickets.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#110

Post by bob »

So the federal government filed its reply to the Constitution Association dude's case. (H/t N10! :bighug: )

The reply is actually better than the original motion to set aside entry of default. It adequately addresses the main points about service, i.e., yes they need to serve the feds, no, mailing something to the White House wasn't sufficient.

And, of course, no standing. Taitz's fails (Drake and Grinols) are cited, and there's a shoutout to Berg.

Dismissal will inevitably follow; the only remaining question is when will this assignment find its way to the top of the shipping clerk's inbox.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#111

Post by noblepa »

gshevlin2 wrote: Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:05 pm Oh, some Birdsite warblers are already claiming she is not eligible. I pointed out that nope, she is indeed eligible. Crickets.
Oh, I'm sure that, if Lilibet were to run for president in 2056, the first year she would be old enough, some birthers would crawl out of the woodwork and argue that "her father was not a citizen when she was born, so she's not a NBC". Others will argue that she was born with allegiance to the UK, which makes her ineligible, despite the fact that no law or provision of the Constitution says this. How is one born with allegiance to anything, anyway? Allegiance is a choice, not a birthright.

IMHO, she is eligible.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#112

Post by bob »

noblepa wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:14 pmOh, I'm sure that, if Lilibet were to run for president in 2056, the first year she would be old enough, some birthers would crawl out of the woodwork and argue that "her father was not a citizen when she was born, so she's not a NBC".
The OG birthers will all be dead by then. (NADT.)

Donofrio might still be around, if his rock-n-roll lifestyle doesn't get to him first.
Image ImageImage
User avatar
noblepa
Posts: 2403
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 2:55 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Retired IT Nerd

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#113

Post by noblepa »

bob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:20 pm
noblepa wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:14 pmOh, I'm sure that, if Lilibet were to run for president in 2056, the first year she would be old enough, some birthers would crawl out of the woodwork and argue that "her father was not a citizen when she was born, so she's not a NBC".
The OG birthers will all be dead by then. (NADT.)

Donofrio might still be around, if his rock-n-roll lifestyle doesn't get to him first.
The current crop of birthers might be dead or in nursing homes, but there will always be idiots. Stupidity does not die.
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#114

Post by bob »

The Constitution Association dudes don't know when they've lost, so today they filed: an amended response to the OSC; request for a hearing; and request for class status. :roll:

The amended response seems ... fine. Whatever error correction was made seems unnecessary, but whatevs.

The request for a hearing is cute. (The court will "nope" that.)

And the request for class status is very short, and very much not in compliance with any and every requirement in how to certify a class-action lawsuit.


When did ineffectual paper throwing become a sport?

H/t: N10! :towel:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
SuzieC
Posts: 925
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:25 am
Location: Blue oasis in red state
Occupation: retired lawyer; yoga enthusiast
Verified:

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#115

Post by SuzieC »

bob wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 9:45 pm The Constitution Association dudes don't know when they've lost, so today they filed: an amended response to the OSC; request for a hearing; and request for class status. :roll:

The amended response seems ... fine. Whatever error correction was made seems unnecessary, but whatevs.

The request for a hearing is cute. (The court will "nope" that.)

And the request for class status is very short, and very much not in compliance with any and every requirement in how to certify a class-action lawsuit.


When did ineffectual paper throwing become a sport?

H/t: N10! :towel:
Ummm hello? Has someone never heard of FRCP 23?
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#116

Post by bob »

SuzieC wrote: Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:06 pmUmmm hello? Has someone never heard of FRCP 23?
Everything was filed by George Rombach ("JD, PhD, CPA").

So, to answer your question: No. (Or: Yes, Rombach has never heard of Rule 23.)
Image ImageImage
User avatar
northland10
Posts: 5596
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
Location: Northeast Illinois
Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
Verified: ✅ I'm me.

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#117

Post by northland10 »

Birther cases thrive off the principle of fractal wrongness. However, they are slacking in the how many ways they can get things wrong. Gondor and that MLB case have, well, hit it out of the park.
101010 :towel:
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#118

Post by bob »

Gibbs, on his weekly Gallups-esque radio show, is talking about their lawsuit again.

It is hi-larious in that it is the exact same Nothing, Like You've Heard Before. The same wild overconfidence, the same "powerful people are paying attention," the same "sources tell me they're nervous" chatter, etc. :yawn:

The only thing different is Gibbs' insistence that the 10th Amendment gives them standing. :roll:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 2177
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:46 pm
Verified: ✅ Curmudgeon
Contact:

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#119

Post by Reality Check »

For the attorneys:

What are the purposes of these three orders on the docket concerning the plaintiffs' motions?
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Todd W. Robinson Accepting Document: First Amended Response to the Ex Parte Application and Cause why this Action Should not be Dismissed, from Plaintiff George F.X. Rombach. Non-compliance with local rule(s), Supplemental documents require court order. Nunc Pro Tunc 6/10/21. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(sxa) (Entered: 06/11/2021)
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Todd W. Robinson Accepting Document: Request for a Hearing on the Ex Parte Application and Cause Why this Action should not be Dismissed, from Plaintiff George F.X. Rombach. Non-compliance with local rule(s), OTHER: Pursuant to the provisions of Civil Local Rule 7.1.b all hearing dates for any motion must be obtained from the law clerk of the judge to whom the case is assigned.. Nunc Pro Tunc 6/10/21. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(sxa) (Entered: 06/11/2021)
and
Notice of Document Discrepancies and Order Thereon by Judge Todd W. Robinson Accepting Document: Request for Recognition of Class Status, from Plaintiff George F.X. Rombach. Non-compliance with local rule(s), OTHER: LR 23.1(a) - The complaint, or other pleading asserting a class action must bear the legend Class Action below the docket number. Nunc Pro Tunc 6/10/2021. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(sxa) (Entered: 06/11/2021)
Seems they did not follow various rules.
User avatar
KickahaOta
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2021 9:17 pm

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#120

Post by KickahaOta »

Correct. These notices are the judge saying 'You didn't follow this rule, but I'm going to let it slide.'
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#121

Post by bob »

KickahaOta wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 6:27 pm Correct. These notices are the judge saying 'You didn't follow this rule, but I'm going to let it slide.'
Yeah; in this case:

1. They didn't seek leave to file their amended response;
2. Hearing dates are set by the judge's shipping clerk; and
3. You must caption every class-action pleading with the words "class action," including the pleading seeking class action.

:fingerwag:

These dudes can't follow the local rules yet know the U.S. Constitution better than every judge. :roll:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 2302
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:50 am
Location: Inland valley, Central Coast, CA
Verified:

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#122

Post by Estiveo »

Well, local rules are unconstitutional because the Bill of Rights doesn't even mention local rules and that's just a trick these activist judges use to try and trick us so there. :nope: :fingerwag: :boxing:
Image Image Image Image
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 14349
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#123

Post by RTH10260 »

Estiveo wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 7:22 pm Well, local rules are unconstitutional because the Bill of RightsMagna Carta doesn't even mention local rules and that's just a trick these activist judges use to try and trick us so there. :nope: :fingerwag: :boxing:
FIFY
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#124

Post by bob »

P&E: The Quo Warranto Avenue:
Joseph DeMaio wrote:OK, in the continuing simmering stew of issues bubbling around the 2020 general election and the results of same, one particular issue caught your humble servant’s eye. That issue concerns the role now being played by “The My Pillow Guy,” Mike Lindell. While his heart may be in the right place, an argument could be made that he is not receiving the best of legal advice.
This understatement is uncharacteristic.
Specifically, he has recently claimed via YouTube that, sometime during the month of July, 2021, a case based on a “writ of quo warranto” will be brought directly in the U.S. Supreme Court (“USSC”) which will result in a 9-0 (i.e., unanimous) decision overturning the 2020 general election and reinstalling President Trump into office. Really? It will be interesting to see if that YouTube video stays posted much longer.

* * *

Accordingly, even if initiated by sundown today, the promised quo warranto relief likely won’t happen in this case at all and, in any event, not during July 2021.

Mr. Lindell might do well to confer with his advisors again, as anomalies of this nature only supply oxygen and ammunition to those committed to the rubric: “Move along… nothing to see here….”
DeMaio was wordy but ... ultimately correct? :faint:
Image ImageImage
User avatar
bob
Posts: 5382
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:07 am

Re: The dregs of birther remainders.

#125

Post by bob »

So: American Samoa.

American Samoa is an unincorporated territory, and its citizens are considered U.S. nationals, and not U.S. citizens. A district court had ruled they were U.S. citizens, but today the 10th Cir. reversed that ruling.

What may be of interest to those here is part of the majority's reasoning:
10th Cir. wrote:[W]e do not understand Wong Kim Ark as commanding that we “must apply the English common law rule for citizenship to determine” the outcome of this case, as the district court phrased it. Wong Kim Ark never went so far. Instead, Wong Kim Ark instructs us that the Citizenship Clause, as with the rest of the Constitution, “must be interpreted in the light of the common law.” ... We take the general meaning of “in the light of” to mean “in context, through the lens of, or taking into consideration.” It is a phrase that introduces persuasive, not binding, authority. Wong Kim Ark therefore tells us to consider the common law in hopes that it sheds light on the constitutional question before us. It does not incorporate wholesale the entirety of English common law as governing precedent.
If the Vattel humpers find this, we're doomed. :smoking:
Image ImageImage
Post Reply

Return to “Other weirdos”