Main Menu

Fair v. Obama

Before starting this article, I refer readers to the site’s editorial policy, which says:

Posting personal information about private individuals is prohibited.

However, when someone files a lawsuit that is a matter of public record, they change from being a private individual to a part of the story itself. So with some reluctance, I publish this article about a lawsuit filed in Maryland, a ballot challenge against Barack Obama by Tracy Fair. I will, however, not embed the 52-page complaint on this page (and thereby display its personal information) but just link to it on Scribd. A further awkwardness is that Ms. Fair is banned from this web site, and is not able to make any comments or complaints about my treatment of the subject. Bans are always a troublesome compromise solution.

Fair v. Obama was filed towards the end of January in the Circuit Court in Carroll County, Maryland. Barack Obama has 90 days from date of service (whenever that is) to file a written response to avoid a default judgment.

Fair alleges Barack Obama is not eligible for the Office of President, and thereby should not be on the ballot. Her grounds for non-eligibility are claims that (hyperlinks refer to topical articles on my web site):

  1. Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen.
  2. Obama is using an alias instead of his alleged adopted name (Barry Soetoro). His Illinois Bar Application is mentioned.
  3. Obama’s social-security number is from Connecticut.
  4. Various statements from Africans suggesting Obama was from Kenya.
  5. Obama was born a dual citizen.
  6. Obama’s birth certificate is alleged to be a forgery by “experts.”

 

Fair cites from the Maryland Election Law  § 5-101 and following regarding candidacy, and specifically § 5-201 that says:

An individual may become a candidate for public or party office only if the individual satisfied the qualifications for that office established by law…

Maryland law requires candidates to certify on a prescribed form that they are eligible, and that the State Board of Elections may require that the candidate provide additional information to verify the accuracy of their application.

The complaint skips over § 5-301 that exempts candidates for President nominated by a national party from filing an application of candidacy.

(g)  Exception for candidates nominated by national party presidential nominating convention.-

(1) A candidate for President or Vice President of the United States nominated by a national party convention is not required to file a certificate of candidacy under this section.

Finally the complaint discusses the right to challenge citing § 9-209:

§ 9-209. Judicial review.

(a)  Timing.- Within 3 days after the content and arrangement of the ballot are placed on public display under § 9-207 of this subtitle, a registered voter may seek judicial review of the content and arrangement, or to correct any other error, by filing a sworn petition with the circuit court for the county.

What concerns me about the citation of Title 5 is if it can be properly applied to Presidential Elections or whether that is exclusively covered by Title 8, Subtitle 5 – Presidential Elections, and in particular § 8-501 Selection of Convention Delegates and Alternate Delegates. Any Maryland Election Law attorneys in the house?

I’m not qualified to say whether the challenge is valid under Maryland law, or that it  has been properly filed in the right venue. The answer to that question will be supplied by the court.

What I will comment on is that the complaint has a section titled “STATEMENT OF FACTS” and those don’t start off very factually:

The term Natural Born Citizen is not based upon English Common Law, but rather on Vattel’s definition written in his legal treatise of 1758 titled, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law.

She didn’t even get the title right (Le Droit des gens ou principes de la loi naturelle appliqués à la conduite et aux affaires des Nations et des Souverains), much less the substantive point about natural born citizen and English Common Law. What follows in the complaint is a catalog of things discussed (largely 2 1/2 years ago) on this web site.

The Maryland Primary is April 3.

Update:

Tracy Fair indicates that her petition is being updated and improved:

My petition has been amended. When I filed the original petition, I did not have an attorney and it was reaching the deadline to file. It was suggested I type up something and get in what I could and that it could later be amended. DOH!

I have since talked to several attorney’s and was recently referred to an attorney in my state by Herb Titus. Herb made suggestions on editing my petition, which I have already done and we are moving forward! Some of the old petition remains but the SSN & BC stuff was removed and other stuff was added. I’ve got plenty of time before I need to serve Obama, so I am waiting it out to see if any more good evidence arises and may even amend it again…

Update: The case was dismissed.

Read more:

, , , ,

47 Responses to Fair v. Obama

  1. avatar
    Atticus Finch February 17, 2012 at 3:04 pm #

    The term Law of Nations in the Constitution has its source in
    English Common Law as enunciated by Blackstone in his Commentaries.

    Courts have long recognized Blackstone’s contribution to the area of Law of Nations.

    “During the eighteenth century, it was taken for granted on both sides of the Atlantic that the law of nations forms a part of the common law. 1 Blackstone, Commentaries 263-64 (1st Ed. 1765-69); 4 id. at 67. Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F. 2d 876, 666 (2nd Cir. 1980)

    “Since the days of Blackstone, “infringement of the rights of ambassadors” have been regarded as one of “the principal offenses against the law of nations.” 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries 68, and for as long as the United States has been a nation, those rights have been recognized to include those that are implicated here — protection from intimidation and the potential of violence, and from assaults on the dignity and peace of the embassy as well.
    Finzer v. Barry, 798 F. 2d 1450,1455 (DC cir. 2004)

    “In 1781 the Congress implored the States to vindicate rights under the law of nations. In words that echo Blackstone, the congressional resolution called upon state legislatures to “provide expeditious, exemplary and adequate punishment” for “the violation of safe conducts or passports, . . . of hostility against such as are in amity . . . with the United States, . . . infractions of the immunities of ambassadors and other public ministers . . . [and] “infractions of treaties and conventions to which the United States are a party.” Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 US 692 , 716(2004)

    The Sosa court further observed:
    We think it is correct, then, to assume that the First Congress understood that the district courts would recognize private causes of action for certain torts in violation of the law of nations, though we have found no basis to suspect Congress had any examples in mind beyond those torts corresponding to Blackstone’s three primary offenses: violation of safe conducts, infringement of the rights of ambassadors, and piracy. Id. at 724

    Finally, the court in Briehl v. Dulles, 248 F.2d 561 (DC Cir. 1957) noted that: “Professor Crosskey refers to the [Blackstone’s] Commentaries as “that great `best-seller’ of the eighteenth century” and points out that some of the members of the Constitutional Convention were on the subscription list of the original American edition in 1772. Politics and the Constitution, Vol. 1, p. 411, and Vol. 2, p. 1326, n. 3 (1953). Id. at fn 88

    As such, the Law of Nations (the concept not Vattel’s book) is part of common law and that Blackstone’s Commentaries which has a Chapter entitled “OF OFFENSES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS” defined Law of Nations as “a system of rules, deducible by natural reason, and established by universal consent among the civilized inhabitants of the world;1 in order to decide all disputes, to regulate all ceremonies and civilities, and to insure the observance frequently occur between two or more independent states, and the individuals belonging to each.”

  2. avatar
    richCares February 17, 2012 at 3:18 pm #

    what a silly suit, she must know this will fail, what’s her point. Instead of submitting this pile of doo to a court she should submit it to “The Onion” where it belongs.

  3. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 17, 2012 at 3:23 pm #

    I’m sure that Tracy is dead serious in her belief that her lawsuit is an accurate description of the history and the law — just as I am dead serious in my belief that the court won’t be having any of it.

    richCares:
    what a silly suit, she must know this will fail, what’s her point. Instead of submitting this pile of doo to a court she should submit it to “The Onion” where it belongs.

  4. avatar
    Majority Will February 17, 2012 at 3:37 pm #

    richCares:
    what a silly suit, she must know this will fail, what’s her point. Instead of submitting this pile of doo to a court she should submit it to “The Onion” where it belongs.

    The Onion has quality, humorous satire. This steaming pile of birther crap is not. There are a few very vocal birthers who are beyond help and reason.

  5. avatar
    G February 17, 2012 at 3:57 pm #

    Although one seriously questions why she would file this steaming pile of dreck in the first place, KBOA has come forward to answer some of these questions over at NBC’s site and has confirmed that she’s submit an amended filing and has a plan to continue to submit further revisions at some point:

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/md-fair-v-obama-2/#comments

    My petition has been amended. When I filed the original petition, I did not have an attorney and it was reaching the deadline to file. It was suggested I type up something and get in what I could and that it could later be amended. DOH!

    I have since talked to several attorney’s and was recently referred to an attorney in my state by Herb Titus. Herb made suggestions on editing my petition, which I have already done and we are moving forward! Some of the old petition remains but the SSN & BC stuff was removed and other stuff was added. I’ve got plenty of time before I need to serve Obama, so I am waiting it out to see if any more good evidence arises and may even amend it again , so keep on posting.

    Based on her nature, I’m just surprised that she didn’t file a long list of internet link citations to her crazy youtube videos…

  6. avatar
    Majority Will February 17, 2012 at 4:15 pm #

    G:
    Although one seriously questions why she would file this steaming pile of dreck in the first place, KBOA has come forward to answer some of these questions over at NBC’s site and has confirmed that she’s submit an amended filing and has a plan to continue to submit further revisions at some point:

    DOH!

    Based on her nature, I’m just surprised that she didn’t file a long list of internet link citations to her crazy youtube videos…

    In other words, any DOH! now.

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 17, 2012 at 4:27 pm #

    Well she did get some good advice about separating the general rumors about Obama from ones that actually pertain to his eligibility. That’s something Orly Taitz has yet to figure out.

    Adding Herb Titus to the mix is also interesting because he is the closest the Birthers have to an authority. Looking at it from one point of view, Titus improves their chances for success, and from the other point of view makes a loss more devastating.

    The Maryland Democratic Primary is April 3. I should put that in the article.

    G:
    Although one seriously questions why she would file this steaming pile of dreck in the first place, KBOA has come forward to answer some of these questions over at NBC’s site and has confirmed that she’s submit an amended filing and has a plan to continue to submit further revisions at some point:

  8. avatar
    JoZeppy February 17, 2012 at 4:38 pm #

    G: Although one seriously questions why she would file this steaming pile of dreck in the first place, KBOA has come forward to answer some of these questions over at NBC’s site and has confirmed that she’s submit an amended filing and has a plan to continue to submit further revisions at some point:

    I checked the docket a few minutes ago, and as of just now, no amendments have been filed. I will be curious to see [who she] found to represent her (birther attorneys in MD? Who knew).

    But just to comment on her complaint,

    Just a disclaimer, although I’m barred in MD, I don’t practice election law.

    First point, her “deadline” is to challenge the accuracy of a ballot. Seeing how she is challenging the accuracy of a primary ballot, and the President has 90 days after being served to respond to that, and the Maryland primary is April 6 – by the time it comes time to respond, it would be dismissed for mootness. I suppose she could refile when the general election ballots come out, but somehow I think there will be a similar result.

    Point two. That deadline she is suing under is to challenge the accuracy of the content and arrangement of the ballot. Both terms are defined by statute (9-205, 9-206). Neither of those terms include the candidates qualifications

    Point three. I’m not sure she is suing the right party. The appropriate election board (I’ll assume it’s the state) makes the final determination of eligibility:

    5-301(b) “Determination by State Board or local board.- The appropriate board shall determine whether an individual filing a certificate of candidacy meets the requirements of this article…” If the State Board has determined the President is eligible, she should be suing them, as it was their determination she is challenging.

    Point four – This was one train wreck of a complaint. Most of that birther b.s. doesn’t belong in a complaint. You plead sufficient facts to create a basis for the complaint. Most of her “facts” are bogus birther legal arguments that would be appropriate to raise in her opposition to Motion to Dismiss (provided she ever serves her complaint to begin with).

  9. avatar
    Rickey February 17, 2012 at 4:39 pm #

    “I have since talked to several attorney’s and was recently referred to an attorney in my state by Herb Titus.”

    She may have talked to a Maryland attorney, but has she found one to take her case? Not as far as I can determine, at least not yet.

  10. avatar
    Majority Will February 17, 2012 at 4:39 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Titus improves their chances for success

    I suppose in their world of losing to empty chairs a change from 0% to 0% would be considered an improvement. 😀

  11. avatar
    Paul February 17, 2012 at 5:03 pm #

    Did anyone else snicker when they notice that the suit lists the respondent’s (Obama’s) address as “UNKOWN?”

  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 17, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

    It was odd. I thought every school child knew where the President lived.

    As for service of Obama in his personal capacity, I couldn’t advise, but can she even sue Obama in a Maryland state court? It’s not like he lives there. Maybe her in-state attorney will get her pointed in a better direction.

    Paul: Did anyone else snicker when they notice that the suit lists the respondent’s (Obama’s) address as “UNKOWN?”

  13. avatar
    Thinker February 17, 2012 at 5:18 pm #

    So, KBOA is operating from the BRCP (Birfoon Rules of Civil Procedure) and submitting the required amended complaint. Once she files her amended complaint, the clock starts again on the defendants’ 90 day response time, right? Even if she filed today, that means a response wouldn’t be due until mid-May–weeks after the primary.

    Pffft. FAIL. Womp, Womp, Womp.

  14. avatar
    y_p_w February 17, 2012 at 5:18 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: It was odd. I thought every school child knew where the President lived.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/write-or-call#write

    4. And finally, be sure to include the full address of the White House to make sure you message gets to us as quickly and directly as possible:

    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC 20500

  15. avatar
    Thomas Brown February 17, 2012 at 5:37 pm #

    Paul:
    Did anyone else snicker when they notice that the suit lists the respondent’s (Obama’s) address as “UNKOWN?”

    Ah, but you must consider that in Birferworld Obama’s only CLAIMING to be who he is, and there may actually be a completely different person, Barry Soetoro, living in the White House… so who can say what happened to the real Barack Obama, or where he lives?

    Or something.

  16. avatar
    donna February 17, 2012 at 6:18 pm #

    “Did anyone else snicker when they notice that the suit lists the respondent’s (Obama’s) address as “UNKOWN?””

    i pointed that out at the onset

    but in birtherstan, obama is an “ILLEGAL RESIDENT” of the white house

    he’s NOT ” POTUS” but “ROTUS”

  17. avatar
    Scientist February 17, 2012 at 6:18 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: As for service of Obama in his personal capacity, I couldn’t advise, but can she even sue Obama in a Maryland state court? It’s not like he lives there.

    The only analogy I can make to a non-candidate suing the President over his place on the ballot would be gto a fan charging onto the filed at Yankee Stadium to argue a call with the umpire.

  18. avatar
    Robert February 17, 2012 at 6:22 pm #

    Just to play with your argument on ‘public person,’ would me filing a lawsuit against a gas station for triple charging me make me a public person?

  19. avatar
    Stanislaw February 17, 2012 at 6:28 pm #

    Tracy Fair indicates that her petition is being updated and improved:

    It may be updated but it will never be improved.

  20. avatar
    G February 17, 2012 at 7:27 pm #

    Yes, absolutely. 😉

    I’ll give crazy psycho KBOA one bit of credit in this – she’s actually attempting to finally put her money where her mouth is and have her day in court.

    Yes, I’m against frivolous nonsense clogging and wasting the courts time and yes, this whole set of Birtherism nuttery has been tried and shot down in so many, many venues by now that even the densest skulls out there should have gotten a clue by now.

    But hey, she’s showing more balls than Mario or Leo as of late, so I’ll give her credit for that. If I seriously believed she was capable of learning from the inevitable failure in front of her, I’d give her more that that minimum passing credit. However, like most of the irrepairably brain damaged out there, she won’t listen or learn from this and will just start squawking conspiracies about the courts being traitors or “gotten to” like all the rest…

    But hey, I’d rather her put her efforts towards these legal avenues of (perceived) grievance. It is much better than the alternative and illegal “lone wolf” type behaviors that can manifest in such unstable personalities…

    Paul: Did anyone else snicker when they notice that the suit lists the respondent’s (Obama’s) address as “UNKOWN?”

  21. avatar
    Dave February 17, 2012 at 7:43 pm #

    This seems to be a permanent and unchangeable feature of birther lawsuits — they’ll never get competent legal advice, because anyone competent would advise them that they have no case.

  22. avatar
    G February 17, 2012 at 7:47 pm #

    Very True!

    Dave: This seems to be a permanent and unchangeable feature of birther lawsuits — they’ll never get competent legal advice, because anyone competent would advise them that they have no case.

  23. avatar
    John Potter February 17, 2012 at 9:58 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I thought every school child knew where the President lived.

    It would never occur to a birther that Obama can be found in the White House. The denial is absolute. Birther headspace cannot contain the concepts “President” and “Obama” simultaneously! To do so would be the first concession to reality, and they can’t (won’t!) have that. Reality is defeat.

  24. avatar
    Thomas Brown February 17, 2012 at 11:30 pm #

    John Potter
    “The denial is absolute. Birther headspace cannot contain the concepts “President” and “Obama” simultaneously! To do so would be the first concession to reality, and they can’t (won’t!) have that. Reality is defeat.”

    George Orwell would have been enlightening re: Birfoonistry. I can see it now:

    “Ignorance is Virtue”
    “Reality is Defeat”
    “Justice is Treason”

  25. avatar
    John Potter February 17, 2012 at 11:39 pm #

    Thomas Brown:
    John Potter
    “The denial is absolute. Birther headspace cannot contain the concepts “President” and “Obama” simultaneously! To do so would be the first concession to reality, and they can’t (won’t!) have that. Reality is defeat.”

    George Orwell would have been enlightening re: Birfoonistry.I can see it now:

    “Ignorance is Virtue”
    “Reality is Defeat”
    “Justice is Treason”

    When first exposed to birtherism, I felt compelled to read Orwell again, both to fortify my skull and sanitize its contents!

  26. avatar
    Keith February 18, 2012 at 12:24 am #

    Scientist: The only analogy I can make to a non-candidate suing the President over his place on the ballot would be gto a fan charging onto the filed at Yankee Stadium to argue a call with the umpire.

    Not only but also, the call that is being argued by that random fan is who is throwing the first pitch of the season! 😎

  27. avatar
    ASK Esq February 18, 2012 at 1:27 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: It was odd. I thought every school child knew where the President lived.

    Well, yeah. But every school child also knows that anyone born here can become President some day. Apparently birthers simply are not smarter than a fifth grader, to borrow a phrase.

  28. avatar
    G February 18, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    Same here…

    John Potter: When first exposed to birtherism, I felt compelled to read Orwell again, both to fortify my skull and sanitize its contents!

  29. avatar
    misha February 18, 2012 at 2:04 am #

    “I have since talked to several attorney’s…”

    Tracy Fair cannot even spell ‘attorneys’ correctly. It’s all downhill from there.

    y_p_w: 4. And finally, be sure to include the full address of the White House to make sure you message gets to us as quickly and directly as possible:
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC 20500

    “Hi – I’d like to order a large with pepperoni. 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue – someone will be at the door.”

  30. avatar
    misha February 18, 2012 at 2:18 am #

    Thomas Brown: George Orwell would have been enlightening

    True story: My cat whispered in my ear, “Four legs good, two legs bad.” I hope you don’t read about us, in some newspaper or website.

    This is not a joke: my cat, a male Siamese sealpoint from the SPCA, has kidney stones and some impacted stool. So far, I’m up to $800, and that’s with health insurance. I would not tie him to the roof of my wife’s car, to make him defecate: http://spreadingromney.com/

  31. avatar
    Keith February 18, 2012 at 6:28 am #

    John Potter: When first exposed to birtherism, I felt compelled to read Orwell again, both to fortify my skull and sanitize its contents!

    Yeah , well I rereading Edgar Rice Burroughs Martian Tales at the moment.

    Mainly to prepare for being disappointed by the John Carter movie coming up in March and the fact that Dejah Thoris won’t be nekkid throughout the flick, but also to be reminded of the idealized, romantic, American/Southern (John Carter was a proud Virginian) sense of ethics and morality that was imagined to be the way of the world in the early 20th century (the first ERB book “A Princess of Mars” appeared in 1912).

    Much of the ‘restore America’ movement is looking back through rose colored glasses at this imagined utopia that ERB captured heroically in the character of John Carter. That it never existed is lost on these people; that they are acting in complete opposite to the ideals of this lost never-never-land is completely unimaginable to them.

  32. avatar
    Arthur February 18, 2012 at 9:51 am #

    Speaking of George Orwell . . . I can’t recommend the site, archive.org enough. I just watched a 1954 BBC television production of Orwell’s “1984” with a young Peter Cushing as Winston Smith.

    http://www.archive.org/details/Meatpies_1984

    archive.org has an amazing collection of text, audio, and video. Want to watch a WWII training film on how to fly the P-39, they’ve got it. Grade school films from the ’50s about personal hygine, they’ve got. Russian navy propaganda films from the 1970s translated by the CIA, they’ve got it. Jack Benny radio shows from the ’30s, yup, they got it. How about a Buster Keaton silent film from 1923? No problem. Books, pamphlets, music, commericials, home movies, it’s incredible.

  33. avatar
    John Potter February 18, 2012 at 12:58 pm #

    Arthur: I just watched a 1954 BBC television production of Orwell’s “1984‘ with a young Peter Cushing as Winston Smith.

    A classic production! I still prefer the “dirtiness” of the John Hurt version. Peter Cushing is awesome. Thanks for spreadin teh word about archives.org.

  34. avatar
    GeorgetownJD February 18, 2012 at 3:53 pm #

    Duplicate of my post over at NBC’s blog:

    Conspicuously absent from the complaint:

    (1) Jurisdictional allegations, including allegations to establish the plaintiff’s standing as well as jurisdictional requirements under the Maryland Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, MD. CTS. & JUD. PROC. CODE
    ANN. 3-401, et seq, including allegations demonstrating an actual controversy between Fair and Obama over legal rights to some recognized interest

    (2) Statement why venue is proper in Carroll County, or any state court, for that matter

    (3) Factual allegations fulfilling the elements for declaratory relief

    (4) Allegations showing entitlement to injunctive relief under Maryland Rules 15-501 through 15-505, specifically, facts and argument demonstrating

    (a) That it is highly likely that Fair will succeed on the merits of her claim;

    (b) How the balance of convenience’ would result in greater injury to Fair herself from refusing to grant the injunction than would be done to Obama by granting the injunction;

    (c) what irreparable injury would be suffered by Fair unless the injunction is granted;

    and

    (d) how the public interest would be served by the granting of an injunction.

    Expect to see this one tossed on a motion to dismiss.

  35. avatar
    NBC February 18, 2012 at 9:21 pm #

    Dr Conspiracy observes that the complaint cites 9-209 but

    Md. Code (2002), 9-209 of the Election Law Article. The errors subject to judicial review under Section 9-209, whether arising from the content and arrangement of the ballot or other facial aspects of the ballot, are confined to the various characteristics of the ballot, not the qualifications or lack thereof of the candidates.

    Source: Ross v. State Board of Elections 876 A. 2d 692, 387 Md. 649 – Md: Court of Appeals, 2005

    So Tracy… Can you enlighten us? Did you file under 9-209?

  36. avatar
    misha February 18, 2012 at 9:26 pm #

    “Fair v. Obama was filed towards the end of January in the Circuit Court in Carroll County, Maryland.”

    Carroll County – You should see it.

  37. avatar
    GeorgetownJD February 18, 2012 at 10:11 pm #

    Tracy says,

    “I’ve got plenty of time before I need to serve Obama, so I am waiting it out to see if any more good evidence arises and may even amend it again…”

    It would behoove her to read the court’s lengthy discussion in Ross v. State Board of Elections about the statutory limitation and the doctrine of laches, and concluded:

    “Ross’s decision to “wait and see” until after the election, prejudiced Branch, the State Board of Elections, and the residents of the Thirteenth Councilmanic District.   …  Therefore, we conclude that the doctrine of laches bars Petitioner’s claim as a matter of law, and we uphold the Circuit Court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of Respondents.

    See also Buxton v. Buxton, 363 Md. 634, 770 A.2d 152 (2001); Parker v. Board of Election Supervisors, 230 Md. 126, 186 A.2d 195 (1962).

  38. avatar
    NBC February 18, 2012 at 10:12 pm #

    Note that if Tracy did file under 9-209, the Appeals Court already has ruled that this rule cannot be used to attack eligibility issues of the candidate…

    What a fail that would be, and it may take at least 90 more days for Tracy to find out as she still has not served the President, who will then have 90 days of time to respond. The time is running out… Tick Tock Tick Tock

  39. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 18, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    Tracy reads this site and leaves comments — I just delete them. So if you want to be helpful that’s fine — just so you know.

    GeorgetownJD: Tracy says,

    “I’ve got plenty of time before I need to serve Obama, so I am waiting it out to see if any more good evidence arises and may even amend it again…”

    It would behoove her to read the court’s lengthy discussion in Ross v. State Board of Elections about the statutory limitation and the doctrine of laches, and concluded:

  40. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 18, 2012 at 11:57 pm #

    Well, we haven’t seen the amended complaint.

    Any day now.

    NBC: Dr Conspiracy observes that the complaint cites 9-209 but…

  41. avatar
    Kenneth Olsen February 19, 2012 at 7:09 am #

    “Bans are always a troublesome compromise solution.”

    That’s rich. Thanks for the comedy.

  42. avatar
    GeorgetownJD February 19, 2012 at 7:52 am #

    She’s sued under the wrong statute, failed to state a cause, missed the statutory deadline, and laches has set in. There’s nothing we can possibly do that would help her.

  43. avatar
    misha February 19, 2012 at 7:53 am #

    Kenneth Olsen: Thanks for the comedy.

    A horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, “why such a long face?”
    The horse replies “if you were a horse, you’d have a long face too.”

    That’s comedy.

  44. avatar
    NBC February 19, 2012 at 12:59 pm #

    She’s sued under the wrong statute, failed to state a cause, missed the statutory deadline, and laches has set in. There’s nothing we can possibly do that would help her.

    And, as with Orly, even if you explain to her the steps, she would find multiple ways to screw it up..

  45. avatar
    NBC February 19, 2012 at 1:24 pm #

    Tracy visited my site where she challenged me to explain how President Obama would be a citizen under the 1866 Civil Right’s Act. I proceeded to do so, exposed her quote mining and she never revisited that thread, only to continue to try to move the goalposts on another thread. When others like Ballantine showed her the position of Trumbull, whom she had quoted discussing the status of Indians, she decided to call it quits and leave voluntarily. She is always welcome to continue her discussion.

    As to Statute 9-209, and the ruling I cited, there are few ways Tracy could rescue her complaint. Since correcting the underlying reliance on 9-209 would not save her from dismissal for failure to state a claim, I do not expect that the MD challenge will go very far. Certainly not when she has yet to serve the defendant whose address is UNKNOWN…

    A funny side note: Immigrants who apply for US citizenship are expected to know the address of the White House. I guess that knowledge does not often extend to US Citizens by birth?

    Tracy whined that people did not address her claims, and when we did, she whined that we were mean, morons, imbeciles and the like and she unsubscribed and ran… Too bad as we were getting somewhere in showing that her understanding of the 1866 Civil Right’s Act was heavily clouded by her pre-existing beliefs. I believe this is an example of confirmation bias?

  46. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 19, 2012 at 2:20 pm #

    Tracy explained that in her rush to make a filing deadline the cover sheet didn’t get retyped. I feel confident that the amended complaint will have the right address on it, which is 1600 Pennsylvania NW, Washington DC (the zip code is left as an exercise for the reader — cause I don’t know it).

    NBC: A funny side note: Immigrants who apply for US citizenship are expected to know the address of the White House. I guess that knowledge does not often extend to US Citizens by birth?

  47. avatar
    NBC February 21, 2012 at 11:28 pm #

    I am sure that Tracy can amend this minor deficiency, unlike her arguments which show a deep level of ignorance and misunderstanding. Now I start to understand why she feels the need to insult.