Larry Klayman

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3626

Post by bob » Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:14 pm


...looks like Klayman's usual yammering about those mean judges. :yawn:

Klayman says that Mueller "will be tried" (in Klayman's fake court) "in the spring." :yankyank:

Klayman says the him losing two cases in one day (from judges of differing political persuasions) was a sign from God. :roll:

"I'm angry, I'm super super angry," says Klayman with a relatively flat affect.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13012
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3627

Post by Notorial Dissent » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:19 am

GIL's got to have some money stashed somewhere with all the galivanting and pretend lawyerin' he does. Was the suit against him personally or against his latest pretend foundation, Legal Watch, and/or him? I think it would be oh so fitting if they seized his latest pretend foundation as part of the claim, and tossed him out of that one as well. IIRC the former Mrs GIL filed a claim against anything Judicial Watch got from him.


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
Northland10
Posts: 8594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#3628

Post by Northland10 » Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:35 am

Notorial Dissent wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:19 am
GIL's got to have some money stashed somewhere with all the galivanting and pretend lawyerin' he does. Was the suit against him personally or against his latest pretend foundation, Legal Watch, and/or him? I think it would be oh so fitting if they seized his latest pretend foundation as part of the claim, and tossed him out of that one as well. IIRC the former Mrs GIL filed a claim against anything Judicial Watch got from him.
Freedom Watch was not a party to the case. In the case where he owes 2 million, he was the plaintiff though I think Judicial Watch did file a counterclaim. It's difficult to figure it out as it has been going on for 13 years. The case where he actually won and the ex's lawyers reached out and grabbed it was the one where he sued JW for their office person who babbled around Orly.


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 10422
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

Re: Larry Klayman

#3629

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:00 pm

I don't know Steve, just saw this because Michael Caputo of all people retweeted this, I like him (Steve, not Russian Mike). I know we've covered this but it's nice to see GIL get smacked down as often as possible.
Steve Outtrim @steveouttrim

BREAKING: Jerome Corsi and Larry Klayman's $1.6 billion lawsuit against Special Counsel Robert Mueller just got thrown out of Court, dismissed with prejudice

I guess the #CSTT "Citizens Grand Jury indictment" didn't have much effect on the legal system!


Corsi and Klayman Lawsuit #Fail

In our last post Insane in the Ukraine Part 3 – Sheep Dipping the Truther we told you about Dr Jerome Corsi, Jason Goodman’s mentor who was called out by a Rockefeller for his ties to a certain small country.

Larry Klayman is a frequent Jason Goodman guest, famous for losing a defamation suit over inappropriate touching of his children and suing his own mother.

Corsi was a target of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. He teamed up with Klayman to sue Mueller for $350 million $1.6 billion. Then they went on Crowdsource the Truth with a “Citizens Grand Jury” to “criminally indict” Mueller. This is obviously a LARP, since there is no such thing in US jurisprudence as a Citizens Grand Jury and civilians do not have the power to indict people no matter how many lawsuits they file.

Well, the judge has ruled – and thrown the case out of Court. Dismissed with prejudice means they can’t re-file – a total loss.
https://burners.me/2019/11/05/corsi-and ... suit-fail/


Image


Photo: Merry Christmas from the titular Mama June. Santa (aka Sugar Bear) and her lovely family!
Hey! Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#3630

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:49 am

bob wrote:
Wed Aug 14, 2019 11:26 pm
Klayman v. The Blacks (nee Pennie v. Obama, N.D. Tex. No. 16-2010) was dismissed [in 2017].
Klayman's site: Dallas Police Sergeant Files Defamation and Civil Rights Complaint Against Dallas Morning News and Others for $290 Million:

The complaint ("curiously" hosted on FW's site) names as defendants the Dallas Morning News (and two of its writers), Mayes Media Group (and its president), Dallas Police Association (and its president, a member, its Assist the Officer Foundation, the foundation's president and an "affiliate" of it), and the City of Dallas (and its former mayor). The complaint alleges: employment discrimination, racial discrimination, retaliation, and 42 USC sec. 2000d [CRA of 1964] violations against the city (and its mayor); and three counts of defamation against everyone but the city. $290M prayer.

Because nothing says, "I stand with cops" like suing the city and the police association. :roll:
Oddly, he did not get around to having getting the summons issued until the end the March. In addition, though the ND of Texas accepts out of state attorneys, they still have to have local counsel or be granted an exception. Looks like the judge is sticking to the local counsel thing.

She states one or more parties need to comply but since nobody else has been served or made an appearance, it sort of narrows the choices down. GIL will probably claim that he is being discrminated against by a liberal woman* because he is a freedom loving white Jewish Christian man.

*A Trump appointee and previously a Texas appeals court justice apponted by Perry.
10/28/2019 5 Request for Clerk to issue Summons filed by Demetrick Pennie. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 2 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 3 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 4 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 5 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 6 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 7 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 8 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 9 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 10 Exhibit(s) Summons, # 11 Exhibit(s) Summons) (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 10/28/2019)

10/29/2019 6 Summons Issued as to John Burk, City of Dallas, Dallas Morning News, Dallas Police Association, Dallas Police Association's Assist the Officer Foundation, Inc., Frederick Frazier, Ariana Giorgi, Naomi Martin, Michael Mata, Brian Mayes, Mayes Media Group, Thomas Popken. (aaa) (Entered: 10/29/2019)

10/31/2019 7 Request for Clerk to issue Summons filed by Demetrick Pennie. (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 10/31/2019)

11/04/2019 8 Summons Issued as to Mike Rawlings. (ndt) (Entered: 11/04/2019)

11/05/2019 9 MOTION to Extend Time Serve Defendants filed by Demetrick Pennie (Klayman, Larry) (Entered: 11/05/2019)

11/06/2019 10 ELECTRONIC ORDER: Unless exempted, Local Rule 83.10(a) requires the appearance of local counsel when counsel of record for a party does not reside in or maintain their principal office in this district. To date, one or more of the parties has failed to comply with Local Rule 83.10. The parties have twenty days from this date to comply if they have not already done so. (Ordered by Judge Ada Brown on 11/6/2019) (chmb) (Entered: 11/06/2019)


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#3631

Post by Northland10 » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:19 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 3:12 pm
"For completeness": FOX's motion to dismiss and Luhn's opposition
Klayman's recent streak of winning continues unabated. Another leftist judge is hating him. Darn those Trump judges. Luhn v Scott was dismissed.

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... 9cv1180-23


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3632

Post by bob » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:26 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:19 pm
Another leftist judge is hating him.
The judge here was nominated by the current president. ;)

Klayman, on his latest :yankyank: with Jason "Crowdsource" Goodman,* claims that he can always tell how a judge will rule ("in cases of political or social importance") by the party of the president who nominated the judge.

Except for when Leon rules against him. Or Lamberth. Or now Friedrich. Then it is "the Deep State got to the judge." :roll:


Of course:
D.D.C. wrote:When considering defamation claims, courts must interpret the statements at issue through the objective lens of a hypothetical, reasonable reader; subjective interpretations of those statements by actual readers therefore lack relevance. See, e.g., Farah v. Esquire Magazine, 736 F.3d 528, 537 (D.C. Cir. 2013)
Gotta lurve it when a judge cites a Klayman fail to explain why Klayman failed yet again. The decision also cites Smith v. Clinton, another Klayman fail.


*
D.D.C. [citations omitted] wrote:Also attached to Luhn’s amended complaint are two affidavits from Hollywood producers Judah Friedman and Jason Goodman. In these affidavits, the producers attest to having read the Times article and having “understood the references to sexually abused and harassed women at Fox News to refer principally to Laura Luhn.” Each of the producers further attests, in identical language, that he understood Scott’s statements concerning her lack of knowledge of Ailes’ sexual abuse “to impugn the integrity [of] and to defame Ms. Luhn, who has reportedly tried to commit suicide and suffers from PTSD as a result of Ailes’ sexual abuse and harassment, as well as the cover-up of this sexual abuse and harassment.”
Well, if Jason Goodman read an article in the Times, then clearly there's a cause of action. :brickwallsmall: Oh, wait:
D.D.C. [citations omitted] wrote:But as noted above, courts are required to analyze defamation claims through the objective lens of a hypothetical reasonable reader, rather than the subjective interpretations of actual readers. Notwithstanding the conclusory statements in Luhn’s affidavits, no objectively reasonable reader could understand Scott’s statements as a commentary on Luhn. The fact that two affiants construed Scott’s statements to contain some oblique, unstated reference to Luhn—an interpretation with no apparent basis in the record—does not require the Court to accept that construction as objectively reasonable.
:doh:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29130
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Larry Klayman

#3633

Post by Foggy » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:28 pm

What? Klayman lost a case? :swoon:

:whisper: (I'm new here)


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 2174
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: Larry Klayman

#3634

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:39 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:26 pm
Northland10 wrote:
Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:19 pm
Another leftist judge is hating him.
The judge here was nominated by the current president. ;)

Klayman, on his latest :yankyank: with Jason "Crowdsource" Goodman,* claims that he can always tell how a judge will rule ("in cases of political or social importance") by the party of the president who nominated the judge.

Except for when Leon rules against him. Or Lamberth. Or now Friedrich. Then it is "the Deep State got to the judge." :roll:


:snippity: :snippity:
Well, if Jason Goodman read an article in the Times, then clearly there's a cause of action. :brickwallsmall:
She is clearly leftist in Larry's view because she supported Mueller's appointment.
In January 2019, Friedrich strongly rebuked the attorneys for Concord Management and Consulting for repeatedly making personal attacks on Mueller's team. The rebuke was triggered by a January 4 filing that questioned the trustworthiness of Mueller's office. Friedrich called Concord's recent filings "unprofessional, inappropriate, and ineffective," and said their "relentless personal attacks" would not affect her decision
.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3635

Post by bob » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:33 pm

Ob. WND: Is Trump judge protecting Fox News?:
Exclusive: Larry Klayman says judicial decision furthers cover-up of Ailes sex abuse

* * *

Incredibly, by using Supreme Court dicta – which is not a ruling, but just a statement by justices – to the effect that federal judges can dismiss complaints if the judge finds the allegations lack plausibility, federal judges frequently subvert "We the People’s" constitutional right to a jury trial decided by one’s peers. The SCOTUS opinion used to justify allowing any federal judge to think he or she is “holier than thou” is Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twomby, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (“Twomby”).

* * *

In this context, this week another federal judicial outrage occurred for one of my real-life clients, Ms. Laura Luhn, the woman who was most damaged by Fox News founder and now disgraced and deceased CEO Roger Ailes. Luhn, whose victimization she alleged in a federal complaint was enabled and covered up by the current CEO of Fox News, Suzanne Scott, had her case dismissed by a new establishment Trump appointee, because the federal judge, Dabney L. Friedrich, deemed her claims implausible.

* * *

It is thus my learned opinion that Judge Friedrich dismissed the case of Laura Luhn, thereby preventing it from going to a jury of Laura’s peers, to protect Fox News, a supporter of the president who put her on the bench. You can judge for yourself. And notwithstanding that I took an immediate appeal of this outrageous ruling, We the People have a lot of hard work to do if we are to disinfect the federal judiciary of the politicians in robes that rule over us, subverting the interests of the citizenry and instead feathering the nests of the vested establishment interests.
P.S. Send money.

Yes: Klayman has decided that Twomby's holding is dicta, and that Klayman alone gets to decide the plausibility of Klayman's complaints. :roll:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 4488
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Larry Klayman

#3636

Post by NMgirl » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:47 pm

What is a “real-life” client? Are GIL’s other clients “fake-life” clients :?:



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13012
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3637

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:55 pm

GIL and Blovario long ago decided that it was dicta if they didn't agree with it or a ruling if they could make it say what they wanted it to.


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
Orlylicious
Posts: 10422
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

Re: Larry Klayman

#3638

Post by Orlylicious » Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:51 pm

had her case dismissed by a new establishment Trump appointee
Even a Trumper judge bounced him :lol:

Still continue to hope that once on the bench, these judges will gain experience and moderate. Even John Roberts has in some cases. Other Trumper judges are already not going along with stupid. I'm happy that one showed GIL that he will still FAIL.


Photo: Merry Christmas from the titular Mama June. Santa (aka Sugar Bear) and her lovely family!
Hey! Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Larry Klayman

#3639

Post by Northland10 » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:38 pm

Orlylicious wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:51 pm
had her case dismissed by a new establishment Trump appointee
Even a Trumper judge bounced him :lol:

Still continue to hope that once on the bench, these judges will gain experience and moderate. Even John Roberts has in some cases. Other Trumper judges are already not going along with stupid. I'm happy that one showed GIL that he will still FAIL.
This would be at least the second one. McFadden dismissed two of his cases earlier this year and Kelly did dismiss a GIL motion in one of the many Judicial Watch cases (I did not bother going to Pacer to see the actual status of that case).

I am not surprised that Mr. "conclusory allegations lacking factual basis" objects to Twombly. He appears to use lawsuits as a discovery fishing expedition in order to find something to harass others. It's his method of FOIA for non-government defendants.


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45296
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Larry Klayman

#3640

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:43 pm

Orlylicious wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:51 pm
had her case dismissed by a new establishment Trump appointee
Even a Trumper judge bounced him :lol:

Still continue to hope that once on the bench, these judges will gain experience and moderate. Even John Roberts has in some cases. Other Trumper judges are already not going along with stupid. I'm happy that one showed GIL that he will still FAIL.
Every President has lots of judicial appointments. Their effect does not last except on SCOTUS. So I am not that worried about these lower level appointees.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3641

Post by bob » Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:27 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:43 pm
Every President has lots of judicial appointments. Their effect does not last except on SCOTUS. So I am not that worried about these lower level appointees.
Concur in part, dissent in part:

Most federal law is made implemented at the circuit-court level. SCOTUS hears a small fraction of those seeking cert., and even a smaller percentage of all cases filed in the federal system. Whereas the circuit courts (mostly) don't have the "luxury" of discretionary review.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
pipistrelle
Posts: 7212
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:26 am

Re: Larry Klayman

#3642

Post by pipistrelle » Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:49 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:43 pm
Every President has lots of judicial appointments. Their effect does not last except on SCOTUS. So I am not that worried about these lower level appointees.
I would like to be reassured by this, but I keep thinking of Neomi Rao, whose dissent on a case that I don't remember consisted of "neener neener I'm not going to bother to cite anything but my own Trumpian beliefs."



Jerry Mander
Posts: 1035
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3643

Post by Jerry Mander » Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:03 pm

Another Klayman case in the nooz.

Womp womp.

https://www.joemygod.com/2019/11/court- ... inst-cair/
Court Boots Loomer’s “Nonsensical” Suit Against CAIR
November 21, 2019 Crackpots, Trump cultists

Jared Holt reports at Right Wing Watch:

Anti-Muslim activist Laura Loomer, who is currently pursuing elected office in Florida, utterly failed in her attempt to sue the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

On Monday, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissed the remainder of Loomer’s lawsuit against the organization on the basis that it “fail[ed] as a matter of law” and was “nonsensical.”

In April, Loomer announced that she had filed a lawsuit against CAIR, CAIR Florida, and Twitter in a Florida court based on the false allegation that CAIR had instigated Loomer’s permanent ban from Twitter; Loomer was actually banned because she repeatedly violated the site’s rules against hateful conduct.

Loomer filed the suit after pranksters convinced her that CAIR was behind her banning.

One of the pranksters filed an affidavit in the suit attesting to having owned her.

Loomer is separately suing Twitter for $3 billion. Her attorney in that case is nutbag Larry Klayman.



User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 10422
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: With Pete Buttigieg and the other "open and defiant homosexuals" --Bryan Fischer AFA
Occupation: "Do Nothing Democrat Savage" -- Donald, 9/28/19 and "Scalawag...Part of an extreme, malicious leftist internet social mob working in concert with weaponized, socialized governments to target and injure political opponents.” -- Walt Fitzpatrick

Re: Larry Klayman

#3644

Post by Orlylicious » Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:04 pm

It was great, posted in the Laura Loomer topic with some more info about this latest fail :P


Photo: Merry Christmas from the titular Mama June. Santa (aka Sugar Bear) and her lovely family!
Hey! Don't miss The Fogbow's Favorite TV Show starring the titular Mama June Shannon -- "Mama June: From Not To Hot!"

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3645

Post by bob » Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:07 pm

Surprisingly, Klayman was not involved with Loomer's CAIR fails.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 2174
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: Larry Klayman

#3646

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:20 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:07 pm
Surprisingly, Klayman was not involved with Loomer's CAIR fails.
Does anyone know about Ron Coleman, her lawyer in this case? Is he a Klayman apprentice?



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3647

Post by bob » Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:25 pm

I believe her CAIR lawyer was Ron Coleman.

Mike D. may know more about him, but he's the attorney who won in SCOTUS the Slants trademark case.

I could see Coleman being sympathetic to Loomer's speech "rights."
Edit: Coleman, not Goldman.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 2174
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am
Occupation: Retired, unemployed, never a lawyer

Re: Larry Klayman

#3648

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:04 pm

bob wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:25 pm
I believe her CAIR lawyer was Ron Goldman.

Mike D. may know more about him, but he's the attorney who won in SCOTUS the Slants trademark case.

I could see Goldman being sympathetic to Loomer's speech "rights."
Rightwing Watch said Ron Coleman. That could be a mistake.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27361
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3649

Post by bob » Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:26 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:04 pm
Rightwing Watch said Ron Coleman. That could be a mistake.
It is Coleman. DYAC! :torches:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34969
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Larry Klayman

#3650

Post by realist » Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:26 pm

Grumpy Old Guy wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 3:04 pm
bob wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:25 pm
I believe her CAIR lawyer was Ron Goldman.

Mike D. may know more about him, but he's the attorney who won in SCOTUS the Slants trademark case.

I could see Goldman being sympathetic to Loomer's speech "rights."
Rightwing Watch said Ron Coleman. That could be a mistake.
The "D" is silent in America. :lol:



ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”