The dregs of birther remainders.

[realist]

I loved "remainders"

Everyone happy now?

[keith]

I counted at least three birthers who signed the letter.

That list of signees includes 'RADM Jack Mehoff, USN, Ret.

I wanna know whose 'rear' he was 'admiral' of? And was he happy with the end of "don't ask, don't tell"?

[scirreeve]

That list of signees includes 'RADM Jack Mehoff, USN, Ret.

I wanna know whose 'rear' he was 'admiral' of? And was he happy with the end of "don't ask, don't tell"?

The man included a screenshot showing that – for a period of time – “Rear Adm. Jack Meehoff” had succeeded in being included with such a distinguished collection of retired leaders.

As it turns out, there is no flag officer named “Jack Meehoff” in the Navy’s records, said Cmdr. David Hecht, a spokesman for the Chief of Naval Personnel, who confirmed the name is a fake.

Arbuckle confirmed on Monday that the name has been removed from the letter’s signatures.

On Monday, Task & Purpose spoke to “Jack Meehoff” – not his real name – who said he was prompted to prank the cabal of McCarthyites because he felt their open letter was “f—ing absurd”, especially in the context of the Jan. 6 riots.

The man – who declined to provide his real name or a copy of his DD-214 – claimed to be a former enlisted submariner. He said Flag Officers 4 America removed “Rear Adm. Jack Meehoff” from the letter on Saturday after Mathias tweeted about how they had fallen for his ruse.

He also said he didn’t put much thought into coming up with the name “Jack Meehoff” as opposed to other joke names – such as “Ben Dover” – and he only realized afterward that the rank “rear admiral” added a double entendre to his fictional pseudonym.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/militar ... k-meehoff/

[Luke]

Of course they'd fall for it. Sorry that Commander Foggy wasn't on the letter.

Good they talked to Orly Taitz, but the Order didn't get off to a great start for these geniuses. Davey, if they talked to O Taitz, did she not tell them about this pesky rule? She's such a stickler for details and citations

Footnote *1*

1 Plaintiff Constitution Association Inc. is alleged to be a corporation (ECF No. 1 at 8) and the docket reflects that it is not represented by an attorney. if the Court finds that it has subject matter jurisdiction, this Plaintiff must be represented by an attorney in order to proceed. See Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, 506 U.S. 194, 202 (1993) (“A corporation may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel.”).


Since Rev Dr Laity Esq already announced the court has issued a DEFAULT ruling in this case, Laity should head out to the court and educate them.

Robert Laity says:
Thursday, May 13, 2021 at 5:40 AM
In such case, prompt refiling for rehearing will ensue. Congress has abrogated its responsibility to check and balance usurpers of the Presidency and Vice-Presidency. The courts have “evaded” the issue long enough. I urge them to take up the task of preserving the integrity of the Presidency and Vice-Presidency. BTW, the U.S.D.C. for the Southern District of California has issued a DEFAULT ruling against Kamala D. Harris in Constitution Association, Inc. v. Kamala Devi Harris, Case # 320-cv-2379-TWR-BLM, U.S.D.C.-Southern District of California. It is an eligibility case.

What will Rev Dr Laity Esq do now? Will he post a retraction so P&E readers know the truth?


Bonus: Joe DeMaio barfed up 3,436 words 20,781 characters trying to prove Vattel was a birther. Always impressive to begin with, "When, in the course of human events". This case will be bounced before P&E readers can even get through it. Wonder how long it took him to write this?:

In conclusion, last night, once again your humble servant channeled Founder John Jay – ahem…, the first Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court – and secured his view as to what he believes the proper decision in USSC Docket 20-1503 should be. He asked that your servant keep his opinion in confidence, which request will be honored. But after confirming to your servant that he keeps a copy of de Vattel’s original 1758 treatise on his nightstand, you can probably guess what his position is.

Natural Born Citizens and USSC Docket 20-1503
WHO IS -- AND IS NOT -- A "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN"?
1 day ago by Joseph DeMaio
On July 25, 1787, John Jay wrote to George Washington, “Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american
army shall not be given to, nor devolved on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

(May 16, 2021) — When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for your humble servant to respond to comments in greater detail than allowed in the designated section of P&E posts, a longer post is required. Such is the case with this offering regarding assertions made by those who reject the likely application of Book I, Ch. 19, § 212 of Emmerich de Vattel’s 1758 treatise, “Le Droit des Gens” or “The Law of Nations,” to the proper interpretation of Art. 2, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution, the “natural born Citizen” restriction for the presidency. Here we go again.

Valued P&E readers, that which follows is somewhat convoluted, but given that the issues are less than simple, a more complex explanation is necessitated. Translation (more on that topic later…): keep some of your favorite caffeinated beverages handy. Your humble servant has his can of Dr Pepper nearby. In addition, it is assumed that readers are already possessed of some historical background relating to the issues, since complete treatment of all the interstices of the matter would make this offering much longer. For that, see all of your servant’s prior P&E posts on the topic.

Ready? Let us begin.

https://www.thepostemail.com/2021/05/16 ... t-20-1503/

Gotta hand it to them, their stupidity and inability to learn anything from the past 11 years is still sort of entertaining. It would be awesome that after DeMaio goes to the big registrar in the sky, John Jay is there waiting for him and says, "Bitch, never said any such thing."

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

[Uninformed]

I loved "remainders"

Everyone happy now?

Good job Bob.

(In comparison to the original/early Fogbow members I have only comparatively recently gained an understanding of the “birthers” and their pet theories. Although I see them as basically racists (maybe at best “nationalists”) I can’t help but have some pity for them - sad sad people unable to move on.)

[p0rtia]

I loved "remainders"

Everyone happy now?

[bob]

[bob]

Just 15 freeper responses so far.

[Reality Check]

Aren't all the remaining Birther dregs?

[bob]

Aren't all the remaining Birther dregs?

Yes, but this will be for the worst of the worst; e.g:

Oh, Joe: Announcing that you aren't running.

[northland10]

I don't plan on running for political office

That would be like GIL saying he was not planning on suing.

[bob]

P&E: Reader Michael Jackson Speaks Out on Mask Mandates:

On Monday, May 17, Morton, IL resident and P&E reader Michael D. Jackson addressed his Board of Trustees, equivalent to a town council, on the state’s mask mandate, which he has been challenging since last fall after Gov. JB Pritzker imposed it a year ago as a result of the COVID-19 declared “disaster.”



* * *

Roll call was taken followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. As a scheduled speaker, Jackson was then called to take the podium. After introducing himself and his ties to the community, Jackson said, “The reason I’m here…I’m against wearing a sharia-burqa slave mask over my face, not because I don’t think wearing masks is appropriate, but we have a choice. I don’t want to get any vaccines or be forced to have a COVID green passport…”

As a registered nurse of “nearly 20 years and “born-again Christian,” Jackson told the council, he believes there is “too much misplaced fear” in general and that for optimum health, citizens need fresh air, sunshine, and “good water, good diet, exercise…” “Living freely and peacefully are all essential for every one of us, I’m sure,” he said.

A former challenger to Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president, Jackson has shared with this writer his objections to wearing a face mask for medical and other reasons. He told the council that he believes “the United States Constitution,” “HIPPA”; the Fourth, Tenth, and 14th Amendments; “statutory law” and the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) are being violated by mask mandates.

Jackson himself is classified as “disabled,” he told The Post & Email and documentation shows.

* * *

In August 2013, [a state representative] wrote a letter to Jackson instructing him not to visit or call his office, but rather, to communicate only by email or the U.S. Postal Service. Copied on Sommer’s letter were the Tazewell County Sheriff, Illinois State Police and Morton Police Department.

The board shrouds Jackson for around seven minutes.

[bob]

American Thinker: Just Who Made Obama's Birth Certificate an Issue?:

In his controversial new book on the 2020 election, Battle For The Soul: Inside the Democrats' Campaigns to Defeat Donald Trump. Edward-Isaac Dovere repeats a canard that has become something of a staple of Democratic mythology.

The rest is the usual evergreen.

[bob]

The blog of Douglas Gibbs (of the Constitution Association): Kamala Harris Cancels Constitution Classes. . .:

Well, sort of.

The Wednesday Night Constitution Class in Murrieta, and the two Thursday Classes in Beaumont and Carlsbad, California [...] this week have been cancelled due to the fact that the Constitution Association, Inc., et al v. Kamala Harris lawsuit demands unexpected attention. My team and I are working to respond to the U.S. Government's response to our filing, which was received recently, and we have but a day to provide a response to.

"Unexpected" is doing some very heavy lifting. It is true that their response to the OSC is due tomorrow, but the court issued its order on May 17. I don't know how this deadline is "unexpected" ... unless the boys forgot to check their PO box.

Bonus: Gibbs was on some show. Around the 45-minute mark, he launches into natural-born citizenship:

The hi-larious part is that he thinks he's sooooo smart, when any veteran of the birther wars have heard his arguments a zillion times over.

And he doesn't even see the punchline coming: Their case will dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, so the court won't bother with all the constitutional knowledge that he's dropping.

[TheNewSaint]

"Patriot Street Fighter"? Oh, Lord, somebody please make this. I want to see a digitized Karl Koenigs and Judge Anna throwing sonic booms at each other.

[gshevlin2]

Does Douglas V. Gibbs even have any law degrees or other legal qualifications? I went to his website, which is all self-aggrandisement and chest-beating claims about him being a "renowned consitutional authority" or some such. But no mention of any legal qualifications or experience.

[bob]

Does Douglas V. Gibbs even have any law degrees or other legal qualifications?

Not of which I'm aware.

But the bestest constitushunial eggspurts are always self-taught, donchaknow.

[gshevlin2]

Well yes, because if he is not taught by the establishment propagandists, he can see outside the box and see those Clever Constitutional Features that mere mortals are unable to discern.

[bob]

So: The Constitution Association filed their response to the OSC. (H/T: N10. )

Sit down: It is ... not very good. At all. The opener:

The government of the United States of America, that is NOT a party of this action and has no standing therein, has brought an Ex Parte Application interfering in this action.

The dudes mailed their complaint to the White House and are now complaining this case doesn't involve the federal government?

They next argue the vice president is neither an officer nor an employee of the federal government.

As for standing, "Article III of the 3 Constitution does not address the issue of 'standing'." Standing in federal courts is based on Article III's limited grant of jurisdiction. And:

It is acknowledged that Plaintiff have had their voting rights disenfranchised or diluted when Defendant sought an office for which she is not eligible.

The passive voice is doing all the work there. And "voter standing" is the same ole loser argument birthers have been making for over a decade.

Finally, as for natural-born citizenship, they tell the court to just read six cases in the complaint. But they are also just the usual birther losers (e.g., Minor's dicta).

The court will have little problem repacking the language from the OSC for the inevitable dismissal order.


The inside baseball: Appearing for the first time is an attorney for the Constitutional Association, Dennis Rasmussen, who has an "office" in a house in Hemet. There's only one attorney named Dennis Rasmussen in California, and that Rasmussen claims to be in Pasadena. (Or not, as that address resolves to a co-working/virtual office.)

Regardless, Rasmussen didn't sign the response; George Rombach ("PhD, JD, CPA") did. And no one else. Since Rombach can only sign for himself, that means everyone else (including the Association) blew off the OSC. I suspect the inevitable dismissal will note the lack of responses from everyone (other than Rombach).

It is funny they were smart enough to realize they needed an attorney, but not smart enough to realize the attorney needed to do something beyond attaching his name to the header. I wonder who is scamming whom here.

[bob]

Gibbs' blog: Constitution Radio: Kamala's Eligibility:

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs,

KMET 1490-AM (www.kmet1490am.com).

Saturdays, 1-3 pm Pacific

* * *

Call in Number: 951-922-3532

Topics:

Kamala Harris: Communist, Anchor Baby, Ineligible for Office
Kamala Harris lawsuit update
Whose job is it to determine eligibility?
Constitution Association Team, Doug, George and Dennis, all on air ... what's next?

KMET is a thousand watt AM station near Riverside.

Bonus:


"God, give me the confidence of a mediocre white dude."

[bob]

I'm listening to the live (AM radio) show now.

Three of them are ing. They are going to be (more) angry and upset soon enough when the court tosses their case.


The show itself it is hilarious: It is Gibbs' show, sponsored by Gibbs. All the commercials are ... by and for Gibbs. And all begging for money.

What a waste of money for a useless vanity project.

[Luke]

Just heard the last few minutes of the 1pm hour. Sounds like next hour is other bs.

Whines... "There's no reason to set the default aside!!"

"As it gets to the appellate level and the Supreme Court Americans will know..."

"By the States not doing what they should..." "I'm glad things are heating up and I'm looking forward to it"

George: "We're asking you to stand with us and We The People will take back the government"

"We've been sheep for too long!"

[bob]

They're switching topics, so I switched them off.

Gibbs advertised a call-in number on his blog, but didn't mention it on air. So I assumed he was pulling a Gallups and not going to entertain dissent.

[Luke]

Nice how Gibbs in his videos chyrons himself as, "Mr. Consitution". He must be cause it's in writing, right?

He pronounces her name wrong, either he's ignorant, or ignorant.

He's such a pompous ass it will be a pleasure seeing him SMACKED DOWN.

Since clearly that will happen, went ahead and ordered from Denny's for us all

Shareable_Family_Packs.jpg (312.85 KiB) Viewed 11177 times

[bob]

Gibbs' blog comments:

When the federal district court dismisses your case for lack of jurisdiction, it is going to cite the 9th Circuit's ruling in Orly Taitz's case.

Because your case is no different than hers.

You morons are super pathetic. Trump is going to be reinstated in August, then you won't have to waste your time worrying about the woman who is a thousand times stronger than you.

We are arguing the courts do have jurisdiction because the Constitution only gives authority to Congress over eligibility regarding its own members. The Tenth Amendment grants authority to the State Legislatures, or to the People. Therefore, we have standing, and the courts have jurisdiction.

Denial is a helluva drug.