GIL: Klayman

[notorial dissent]

Peaceful protester??? Ya sure!!!! I'm equally sure the FBI came visiting without a warrant, too also-NOT!!!. Judging by that list of chargesI would expect things to not go well for him, and with GIL's help they could get a whole lot worse.

[bob]

Klayman now inditing the boss, Soros ("and corrupt DAs"):

[notorial dissent]

Of course he did. Yaawwn!!

[bob]

[Suranis]

Uh... yah.,. yah... you do that.

IN the meantime I'll turn the pages of this book in another example of effective action.

[bob]

[Foggy]

This is so exciting!

[Jim]

This is so exciting!

So what's GIL's Citizens Grand Jury record, 0-186?

I just keep waiting for GIL to do something truly stupid and try to enforce his citizens grand jury findings of guilt.

[bob]

For those who haven't had the "pleasure" of witnessing Klayman in action, here's his attempt to defend against Wonkette's inevitable dismissal of his lawfare (yes, that suit still not yet dead):

[Luke]

For those who haven't had the "pleasure" of witnessing Klayman in action, here's his attempt to defend against Wonkette's inevitable dismissal of his lawfare (yes, that suit still not yet dead):

Thanks, Bob. Klayman got 30 days (until 2/5) to file a proposed order because his one assistant has COVID and the office is "depleted". Wonkette is also filing a proposed order, they wanted 10 days because this has gone on for two years.

[northland10]

For those who haven't had the "pleasure" of witnessing Klayman in action, here's his attempt to defend against Wonkette's inevitable dismissal of his lawfare (yes, that suit still not yet dead):

I thought it was dismissed earlier. Was he able to file some amended thing that tried to fix his fatal errors?

No, I have not watched it and don't think I want to watch him tonight.

[bob]

I thought it was dismissed earlier. Was he able to file some amended thing that tried to fix his fatal errors?

I haven't been following this case closely, but, yes: I believe the complaint was dismissed, but with leave to file an amended complaint.

This is probably his last bite at this apple (until the inevitable appeal).

[notorial dissent]

I had forgotten how painful it was to listen to his voice. A mistake I won't make again. He comes across like poorly prepared 1^st year doing a moot court for the first time.

[northland10]

Because 4 pending cases in DC are not enough, GIL sued the DC board along with Fox, Porter, and Kaiser, in Florida state court. He filed the case in December, the defendants removed it to Federal court (step one to transferring it to DC), and less than a week later, Klayman voluntarily dismissed it.

He just can't help himself.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 70.1.0.pdf

[northland10]

Klayman lost to Fitton, again, in some case last fall in DC. He appealed to the DC Circuit. He then filed a motion to transfer to the 5th circuit because he is suing, well appealing a lost lawsuit, against a bunch of the DC Circuit judges for ruling against him.

He keeps saying because he is admitted to the 5th (where neither he nor Fitton live). I guess this is because of the trouble he had with the 11th, however, this suit was brought pro se.

This appeal must be transferred to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, where Mr. Klayman is admitted, since the judges presiding over this appeal in this Court have a clear conflict of interest, as they are Defendants and Appellees in the appeal styled Klayman v. Rao et al, 21-5269 (D.C. Cir.). Because the Rao case also involves Judicial Watch, the conflict of interest is even more pronounced, and therefore a transfer to the Fifth Circuit must be made in the interests of justice and fundamental fairness. See Code of Conduct for United States Judges 3(C)(1)(a), which states that a judge may not preside over a case where “the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.”

ACCORDINGLY, this matter must be transferred to a neutral circuit, like the Fifth Circuit where Mr. Klayman is admitted.

[northland10]

The bar defendants are getting annoyed with Klayman's court games.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 2.64.0.pdf

[RTH10260]

ACCORDINGLY, this matter must be transferred to a neutral circuit

May I suggest the jurisdiction of Round Folder, Boondocks

[bob]

Klayman lost to Fitton, again, in some case last fall in DC. He appealed to the DC Circuit. He then filed a motion to transfer to the 5th circuit because he is suing, well appealing a lost lawsuit, against a bunch of the DC Circuit judges for ruling against him.

He keeps saying because he is admitted to the 5th (where neither he nor Fitton live). I guess this is because of the trouble he had with the 11th, however, this suit was brought pro se.

You don't have to live in a circuit to be admitted to its bar. Circuit bar admission is relatively easy; often just be a member of a feeder district court. I would not be surprised if Klayman is a member of a federal district court in Texas (IIRC, at least one of those districts don't require Texas bar membership). And Texas is where Klayman is suing the Dallas police force, China over the COVID, etc.

And, of course, Klayman is angling for the 5th because it is one of the most conservative circuit courts these days.

But none of this is meaningful: Klayman's stuck where he is. Circuit judges chuckle when someone sues them and then demands to transfer to another circuit. "No" is always the answer.

[Luke]

GIL has been tweeting almost non-stop about gay sex. Considering all his failures with women, asked GIL if there's something he wants to share with all of us and encouraged him to live his best life!

[northland10]

Remember this?

The due date for a petition to SCOTUS in Larry v Judicial Watch (the original and big one) was December 14. So, on December 10th he filed an application for a 60-day extension. He claims that he did not realize the rules had changed until he checked the docket on the 9th. You'd think that somebody who is looking to be $2 million lighter might have been on top of getting this done and checking ahead of time.

Oh yeah, this is a huge case that SCOTUS needs to take up.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/ ... ainDoc.pdf

Do I believe his excuse? Of course not. As for CJ Roberts, probably not too much as he only gave him a few weeks.

Dec 15 2021 Application (21A225) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until January 7, 2022. No further extensions of time shall be granted. See this Court's Rule 30.

He has had since September to deal with this but he had his citizen grand juries to do.

It was due on the 7th, we are now on the 25th and there is no new filing for his case nor anything from the application above. I waited a week or so in case there was a delay for SCOTUS to scan the petition and create the docket entry, but it is looking like it is not happening.

Is he going to roll over on $2 million because he was too busy indicting everybody?

[northland10]

Previously, GIL sued every judge on the DC Court of Appeals because they ruled against him on his various discipline issues. Obviously, that failed so he appealed the case. He then tried to have it transferred to the 5th because he was suing a bunch of the judges on the DC Circuit, such as Rao for rulling against him previously.

Spoiler: It didn't work.

Larry Elliott Klayman,
Appellant
v.
Anna Blackburne-Rigsby, Hon., et al.,
Appellees
BEFORE: Wilkins, Rao, and Jackson, Circuit Judges

O R D E R
Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, which includes a request to transfer, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that appellant’s request to transfer be denied. Appellant has provided no reasonable basis for questioning the impartiality of the panel. See 28
U.S.C. § 455(a); Code of Conduct for United States Judges Canon 3(C); Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 2B, Ch. 2, Published Advisory Opinion No. 103 (2009). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted. The merits of the parties’ positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam). The district court correctly determined that appellees are immune from appellant’s Section 1983 claims for injunctive relief, which it properly concluded were based on actions appellees undertook in their capacities as judicial officers. See Roth v. King, 449 F.3d 1272, 1286 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (“42 U.S.C. § 1983, as amended in 1996 by the Federal Courts Improvement Act, explicitly immunizes judicial officers against suits for injunctive relief.”). Further, appellant has not shown that declaratory relief is
unavailable. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

As expected, he filed his petition for rehearing en banc.

And as I see another closed case recently, I suspect there may be a follow-up post here soon.

Edit: Never mind on the other closed case. It was a voluntary dismissal for his attempt to sue the DC Board of Tormenting Klayman in Florida which I covered above somewhere.

Edit: Edited again to add:

It would appear that it is not a petition for a rehearing but a "Notice of Intent to file a petiion for rehearing."

In light of the Court’s January 20, 2022 order granting Appellees’ Motion for Summary Affirmance, Appellant Larry Klayman hereby informs the Court that he intends to file a timely Petition for Rehearing En Banc as well as pursue all other avenues of relief and redress. The three-judge panel comprised of Judge Wilkins, Judge Rao, and Judge Jackson has egregiously and willfully, without explanation much more any legal analysis, violated the Code of Judicial Conduct in ruling on matters where each of these judges has a conflict of interest, as they all are Defendants-Appellees in case styled Klayman v. Rao et al, 21-5269 (D.C. Cir.). See Code of Conduct for United States Judges 3(C)(1)(a).

The judges were egregious because, um, they ruled the obvious? You don't sue the judges who ruled against you. It does not work that way.

[northland10]

In his Florida state case against Rober Stone, he now claims to have COVID.

Screenshot 2022-01-25 191454-2.jpg (240.82 KiB) Viewed 829 times

I have trouble believing him. I don't know why.

[northland10]

GIL has been tweeting almost non-stop about gay sex.

Since he was tweeting all this after he filed an emergency order to reschedule a hearing because he had COVID, this is how he spends his 'COVID' time instead of actually working on the cases he has filings due in.

He is "highly symptomatic so he cannot do his normal tasks but can only sit around tweeting about gays.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 2.65.0.pdf

At least he could file his appeal brief in the 5th for Corsi on the 18th (sorry not going to spend the 3 bucks on that one).

[pipistrelle]

He tries to look young and manly in his videos but now he’s a frail elderly guy gonna die of COVID?

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

He tries to look young and manly in his videos but now he’s a frail elderly guy gonna die of COVID?