I have recently filed a formal complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice Professional Conduct Office and Inspector General of the D.O.J. The complaint is against “Each and every U.S. Attorney General since Eric Holder and including Merrick Garland”. The Charge: Dereliction of duty and Non-feasance in Office for not defending the integrity of the Office of the Presidency and Vice-Presidency from usurpations under the DC Code.
Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
P&E comment:
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
The lack of self-awareness in this one is strong master...doesn't even realize he's the one they're defending against!bob wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 10:45 am P&E comment:I have recently filed a formal complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice Professional Conduct Office and Inspector General of the D.O.J. The complaint is against “Each and every U.S. Attorney General since Eric Holder and including Merrick Garland”. The Charge: Dereliction of duty and Non-feasance in Office for not defending the integrity of the Office of the Presidency and Vice-Presidency from usurpations under the DC Code.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
P&E comment:
So Laity hasn't been a union steward for nearly two decades, but still has cases pending in the fed's grievance system?Laity wrote: I filed a legitimate citizen complaint with the USDOJ. The US Attorney General is NOT above the law. I know how to file federal complaints. I have done so for almost five decades. Filing such complaints was part and parcel of my elected position as a Federal Union official and employee representative. I STILL have pending cases, even though I retired in 2003. My DOJ complaint is not a “random letter”. I filed complaints against these respondents YEARS ago, while they were IN office. My current charges are merely a follow-up reiteration of their non-feasance in office which NOW includes Merrick Garland, et al.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Essentially true! While there is some evidence that Laity has helped federal employees file grievances, there's no evidence that an employee Laity "helped" actually prevailed.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
<sigh>
Despite the commendable efforts of orlylicious, bob, northland10, and others, this thread lacks its former pizzazz.
Perhaps some intermeddler could introduce Mr. Laity to sections (b), (c), and (d) of Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which list a variety of ways to obtain relief from an iniquitous judgment, either through a motion under Rule 60 or by means of a separate action.
I'm confident that, with a little encouragement, Mr. Laity will come to believe that numerous paths exist for turning his defeat into eventual victory.
Rule 60. Relief from a Judgment or Order
[section (a) omitted]
(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
(c) Timing and Effect of the Motion.
(1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time—and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.
(2) Effect on Finality. The motion does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation.
(d) Other Powers to Grant Relief. This rule does not limit a court's power to:
(1) entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding;
(2) grant relief under 28 U.S.C. §1655 to a defendant who was not personally notified of the action; or
(3) set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.
[section (e) omitted]
Despite the commendable efforts of orlylicious, bob, northland10, and others, this thread lacks its former pizzazz.
Perhaps some intermeddler could introduce Mr. Laity to sections (b), (c), and (d) of Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which list a variety of ways to obtain relief from an iniquitous judgment, either through a motion under Rule 60 or by means of a separate action.
I'm confident that, with a little encouragement, Mr. Laity will come to believe that numerous paths exist for turning his defeat into eventual victory.
Rule 60. Relief from a Judgment or Order
[section (a) omitted]
(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;
(4) the judgment is void;
(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or
(6) any other reason that justifies relief.
(c) Timing and Effect of the Motion.
(1) Timing. A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time—and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.
(2) Effect on Finality. The motion does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation.
(d) Other Powers to Grant Relief. This rule does not limit a court's power to:
(1) entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding;
(2) grant relief under 28 U.S.C. §1655 to a defendant who was not personally notified of the action; or
(3) set aside a judgment for fraud on the court.
[section (e) omitted]
- Gregg
- Posts: 5502
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
- Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
- Occupation: We build cars
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Or.....we could send the Wiener Dog Wet Team, which is always good for a few laughs.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
You better watch that. You never know where it might go.
Hic sunt dracones
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
P&E comment:
I can think of one reason: hiring incompetent representation like Laity.Laity wrote:I have pending cases. Retirement from my paid position does not preclude me from representing Federal Employees. As I have said. I still have clients whose cases before the EEOC and MSPB have not been resolved as yet. You tell Me why it takes so many years to go through these adjudications. One case I had and which I won took (16) years.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
bob wrote: ↑Thu Aug 19, 2021 10:34 am P&E comment:I can think of one reason: hiring incompetent representation like Laity.Laity wrote:I have pending cases. Retirement from my paid position does not preclude me from representing Federal Employees. As I have said. I still have clients whose cases before the EEOC and MSPB have not been resolved as yet. You tell Me why it takes so many years to go through these adjudications. One case I had and which I won took (16) years.
X 4
X 32
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
"For the record," I did find a MSPB decision in which Laity successfully argued his "client" had pleaded sufficient facts to invoke the hearing officer's jurisdiction. The case was remanded so the hearing officer could rule on the merits.
- Luke
- Posts: 5589
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
- Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Laity has been posting up a storm on Facebook, but not about Kamala Harris. Maybe he's sworn to secrecy so "Big 'Plan B'" can be sprung as a huge surprise?
He and Ed Sunderland seem to be really enjoying their Labor Day holiday weekend so that's nice.
He and Ed Sunderland seem to be really enjoying their Labor Day holiday weekend so that's nice.
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
- Gregg
- Posts: 5502
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 am
- Location: Cincinnati, Gettysburg
- Occupation: We build cars
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
And this video of Democratic operatives dumping backpacks full of ballots into drop boxes? You have that, I assume? And the precincts reported thousands of ballots received that they didn't sent out, yes?
0h, you didn't see it, but you heard about it from you neighbor's brother's cousin's mailman's sister's best friend saw on OAN. I see.
0h, you didn't see it, but you heard about it from you neighbor's brother's cousin's mailman's sister's best friend saw on OAN. I see.
Supreme Commander, Imperial Illuminati Air Force
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
You don't have to consent, but I'm gonna tase you anyway.
- pipistrelle
- Posts: 6695
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
The “Secretive Service” is so secretive no one’s heard of it.
- Luke
- Posts: 5589
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
- Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Dang, we missed Laity's birfday. https://www.facebook.com/robert.c.laity
Some of the Crème de la Crème of birthers came out.
Edward C Noonan
Happy Bday!
Sharon Rondeau
Happy birthday, Bob!
Sharon posted from her personal FB account which only has photos of nature. https://www.facebook.com/sharon.rondeau.3
But not Miki Booth or Orly Taitz.
What happened with those other Constitution guys and their doomed lawsuit?
Some of the Crème de la Crème of birthers came out.
Edward C Noonan
Happy Bday!
Sharon Rondeau
Happy birthday, Bob!
Sharon posted from her personal FB account which only has photos of nature. https://www.facebook.com/sharon.rondeau.3
But not Miki Booth or Orly Taitz.
What happened with those other Constitution guys and their doomed lawsuit?
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
- pipistrelle
- Posts: 6695
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:27 am
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
She has thousands of friends. I have a couple hundred. What am I doing wrong?
- Frater I*I
- Posts: 3210
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:52 am
- Location: City of Dis, Seventh Circle of Hell
- Occupation: Certificated A&P Mechanic
- Verified: ✅Verified Devilish Hyena
- Contact:
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Start posting crazy conspiracy theories and viola, thousands of followers...pipistrelle wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 8:47 pm She has thousands of friends. I have a couple hundred. What am I doing wrong?
I'll get you started....
The Industrial Revolution, was neither industrial nor a revolution....
Discuss...
"He sewed his eyes shut because he is afraid to see, He tries to tell me what I put inside of me
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"
Trent Reznor
He's got the answers to ease my curiosity, He dreamed a god up and called it Christianity"
Trent Reznor
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Still in shipping clerk purgatory. (Translation: the OSC re: dismissal remains pending, but no new activity.)orlylicious wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 8:44 pm What happened with those other Constitution guys and their doomed lawsuit?
- Foggy
- Dick Tater
- Posts: 9554
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
- Location: Fogbow HQ
- Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
- Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
The Dark Ages had plenty of sunshine and they didn't really take ages, only about 500 years.Frater I*I wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 9:17 pm The Industrial Revolution, was neither industrial nor a revolution....
Discuss...
Your turn.
Out from under.
- Sam the Centipede
- Posts: 1834
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:19 pm
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
The Middle Ages weren't in the middle?
- Foggy
- Dick Tater
- Posts: 9554
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
- Location: Fogbow HQ
- Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
- Verified: as seen on qvc zombie apocalypse
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Off Topic
A watched pot actually takes the exact same time to boil as an unwatched pot. Looking at a pot of water has no effect on its temperature.
Out from under.
- Sam the Centipede
- Posts: 1834
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:19 pm
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
Huh, no stamped, notarized, gold edged, signed, illuminated, sealed birth certificate on vellum deposited in the National Archives from Laity to prove this, so no birthday for this obvious fraud.orlylicious wrote: ↑Tue Sep 14, 2021 8:44 pm Dang, we missed Laity's birfday. https://www.facebook.com/robert.c.laity
Rather la Crasse de la Crasse.Some of the Crème de la Crème of birthers came out.
- Luke
- Posts: 5589
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:21 pm
- Location: @orly_licious With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
After his lovely birthday celebration, Rev Dr Laity Esq is already HOPPING MAD!
As a comment to a AntiVaxxer P&E article called "Inventor of mRNA Technology Calls COVID Vaccines 'Toxic'", https://www.thepostemail.com/2021/09/15 ... nes-toxic/ Dr. Laity is fired up! Oh no, The Hague! This is serious!
His Facebook:
As a comment to a AntiVaxxer P&E article called "Inventor of mRNA Technology Calls COVID Vaccines 'Toxic'", https://www.thepostemail.com/2021/09/15 ... nes-toxic/ Dr. Laity is fired up! Oh no, The Hague! This is serious!
Robert Laity says:
Friday, September 17, 2021 at 4:08 AM
Facebook is censoring any negative reporting on the dangers of the Covid “Vaccine(s)”. I have sent several complaints to the International Criminal Court in the Hague regarding the widespread censorship being undertaken by Facebook, inter alia, acting as an agent of the corrupt Biden administration. What the government is prohibited from doing (infringing on first amendment rights) Facebook and Twitter are doing FOR them. “He who acts through an agent acts himself”. The USA is violating the constitution.
His Facebook:
Lt Root Beer of the Mighty 699th. Fogbow s titular Mama June in Fogbow's Favourite Show™ Mama June: From Not To Hot! Fogbow's Theme Song™ Edith Massey's "I Got The Evidence!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5jDHZd0JAg
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
For people who claim to hate globalists, seeking help from an international agency seems ... odd.Laity wrote: Facebook is censoring any negative reporting on the dangers of the Covid “Vaccine(s)”. I have sent several complaints to the International Criminal Court in the Hague
Regardless, Dr. Laity Esq. "forgot" the U.S. doesn't recognize the ICC's jurisdiction.
- northland10
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:47 pm
- Location: Northeast Illinois
- Occupation: Organist/Choir Director/Fundraising Data Analyst
- Verified: ✅ I'm me.
Re: Robert Laity v VP Kamala Harris
But the ICC could go after the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA because it is the United:-States of the family America that is not under the jurisdiction of the ICC because it is sovereign. But the big evil ICC private corporation could go after the strawman UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.bob wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:01 pmFor people who claim to hate globalists, seeking help from an international agency seems ... odd.Laity wrote: Facebook is censoring any negative reporting on the dangers of the Covid “Vaccine(s)”. I have sent several complaints to the International Criminal Court in the Hague
Regardless, Dr. Laity Esq. "forgot" the U.S. doesn't recognize the ICC's jurisdiction.
101010