Main Menu

Vogt to Judge: your order is a non-sequitur

Douglas Vogt filed something with the US District Court in Seattle, and asked that it be assigned a case number. Judge Robart issued an order to show cause why the case shouldn’t be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Yesterday, in an answer to the Judge’s order, Vogt claims that what he filed isn’t a case after all.

Well, we all knew that. Even though not invoking the jurisdiction of the court, somehow Vogt thinks that the Court is “bound” by something—he mentions the Ninth and Tenth Amendments which talk about rights retained by the states and the people, and don’t mention courts. Specifically, Vogt demands a statement from the Court that he is discharged from any obligation to report his bogus felony and treason charges, and he demands that the Court convene a grand jury to investigate those charges. As birther plaintiffs have done in the past, Vogt invokes a duty, but never shows how any law imposes it.

Judge Robart in his order to show cause made it abundantly clear that the law does not allow private citizens to compel a criminal prosecution, a point lost on Vogt (and his ghost-writing legal helper reported to be Montgomery Blair Sibley).

As for discharging Vogt of his imagined legal obligation to report a felony, the court papers he filed are ample evidence that he reported what he reported. The Court is under no obligation, nor I think does it have jurisdiction to make such a declaration as to the innocence of Vogt in some hypothetical future prosecution. It reminds me of the lawsuit where Steven Lee Craig wanted the court to declare him a natural born citizen. In that case the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of Craig v. United States on jurisdictional grounds. Just as Craig had no legally cognizable right to be declared a natural born citizen, Vogt has no cognizable right to be declared discharged from his obligations under the Misprision statutes, nor to have a grand jury convened as the result of his filing with the Court.

Vogt cites the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 6(a) that requires a grand jury to be summoned in the public interest, but it is the Court that decides what is in the public interest, and not Douglas Vogt. Vogt makes a whiny rant about how important his claims are, and how the deck is stacked in favor of the government in the age of an emasculated grand jury system and how the Court is the last hope to save America from the usurper.

Vogt’s Answer extends the claim that the Court has an obligation to refer the matter to a grand jury to say that the Court is also obligated to appoint an independent counsel to guide the grand jury. While there is authority under US law for the appointment of an independent counsel by the judiciary, such as mentioned in 28 USC § 592-3, application for an independent counsel is made by the Attorney General, not a private citizen. And here we get back to a central defect of Vogt’s action—he is a private citizen, not a prosecutor.

So with this Answer filed, we may await the court’s scholarly refutation, which will probably not use the term “whiny” as I did. The duty of the federal courts in this case, as stated in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3), is: “If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”

The opinions expressed in this article should not be considered legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

Update:

The case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on November 14.

, , , , ,

47 Responses to Vogt to Judge: your order is a non-sequitur

  1. avatar
    Arthur November 13, 2013 at 11:02 am  (Quote) #

    “So with this Answer filed, we may await the court’s scholarly refutation, which will probably not use the term “whiny” as I did.”

    They may not use the word “whiny,” but that’s what they’ll be thinking, and probably words even saltier than that, e.g., “swell,” and “so’s your old man”

  2. avatar
    The Magic M November 13, 2013 at 11:50 am  (Quote) #

    Vogt has no cognizable right to be declared discharged from his obligations under the Misprision statutes

    Indeed there is no such right as “getting a declaration that what I did/do is/isn’t against the law”, in no legal system I know of. If it were, courts would be inundated with requests of arbitrary complexity.
    In civil law, you can file a declaratory action, but only in specific circumstances (e.g. because somebody repeatedly threatens to sue you and you need to force that person to “put up or shut up”).

  3. avatar
    Curious George November 13, 2013 at 12:02 pm  (Quote) #

    ….. and there was no joy in Birtherville. The mighty Birther Vogt struck out.

  4. avatar
    Notorial Dissent November 13, 2013 at 12:04 pm  (Quote) #

    Doc:
    The opinions expressed in this article should not be considered legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

    Neither is Vogt, and Monty isn’t much of one either, so I don’t think you much need to worry.

  5. avatar
    Slartibartfast November 13, 2013 at 12:21 pm  (Quote) #

    That’s too bad, it seems like Vogt could really use some legal advice…

    Doc C: The opinions expressed in this article should not be considered legal advice. I am not a lawyer.

  6. avatar
    Joey November 13, 2013 at 12:37 pm  (Quote) #

    If you see someone is trying to break into your neighbor’s house, do you call the cops or do you file a statement with a federal judge?

  7. avatar
    brygenon November 13, 2013 at 12:46 pm  (Quote) #

    Slartibartfast: That’s too bad, it seems like Vogt could really use some legal advice…

    And, in a way, it’s too bad that we don’t know how many prospective birthers got and accepted competent legal advice. We never hear about those.

  8. avatar
    Keith November 13, 2013 at 12:57 pm  (Quote) #

    I haz popcorn.

  9. avatar
    Benji Franklin November 13, 2013 at 1:06 pm  (Quote) #

    brygenon: And, in a way, it’s too bad that we don’t know how many prospective birthers got and accepted competent legal advice. We never hear about those.

    Good point! I’ll bet there were quite a few who went to competent CONSERVATIVE, even Obama-hating lawyers, WHO THEY KNEW PERSONALLY, with lunatic Birther “findings” and allegations, who were told honestly, “This is crazy! There’s no case here – no violation period.”

    And you’re right that we never heard about them, I bet.

  10. avatar
    JPotter November 13, 2013 at 1:08 pm  (Quote) #

    It’s really a load off to know the entire country is no longer in danger of misprison!

    That dirty Obama, using the national media to reel us all into his felonious schemes!

    😀

  11. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy November 13, 2013 at 1:08 pm  (Quote) #

    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

  12. avatar
    Slartibartfast November 13, 2013 at 1:48 pm  (Quote) #

    How about pseudo-legal wachamathingy?

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

  13. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG November 13, 2013 at 1:48 pm  (Quote) #

    Poopies. That describes this sort of thing well as in “Orly has brought her latest poopies with her to court!”

  14. avatar
    Jim November 13, 2013 at 1:49 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

    Spoiled brat throwing a hissy fit? Seems like the best fit to me.

    Doc: “The opinions expressed in this article should not be considered legal advice. I am not a lawyer.”

    They can, however, be considered a comedy routine. Smiles all around! 😀

  15. avatar
    JPotter November 13, 2013 at 1:53 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

    rant, screed, obsession diary, ejaculation, special purpose, therapy journal, undoing, what the voices made him type ….

  16. avatar
    Slartibartfast November 13, 2013 at 1:54 pm  (Quote) #

    Interesting point. Considering Zullo had to go to over 200 expert document examiners before finding Reed Hayes, there’s bound to be some birthers who sought competent legal advice and gave up before they found someone who would just tell them what they wanted to hear.

    brygenon: And, in a way, it’s too bad that we don’t know how many prospective birthers got and accepted competent legal advice. We never hear about those.

  17. avatar
    OllieOxenFree November 13, 2013 at 1:58 pm  (Quote) #

    Perhaps he wants a declaration of his “discharge from any obligation to report his bogus felony and treason charges,” so that he can show that the court, through the “evidence’ that he has filed, is aware of a possible criminal act having occurred and ipso facto is compelled to convene a grand jury after having relinquished him of said obligation to report it?

  18. avatar
    gorefan November 13, 2013 at 2:30 pm  (Quote) #

    If you zoom in on Vogt’s PDF, there are a number of pixel-for-pixel identical letters. He must have cut and pasted the thing from other documents. LOL

  19. avatar
    roadburner November 13, 2013 at 2:44 pm  (Quote) #

    Joey:
    If you see someone is trying to break into your neighbor’s house, do you call the cops or do you file a statement with a federal judge?

    that would depend on if you were writing a book about burglaries and had only completed 17 out of 18 chapters

  20. avatar
    Bob November 13, 2013 at 3:21 pm  (Quote) #

    Does the judge have any obligation to respond to Mr. Vogt? If not he should just file the Vogt-thingy under Sour Grapes.

  21. avatar
    Reality Check November 13, 2013 at 3:22 pm  (Quote) #

    I believe Brooke Paige in Vermont tried to hire a real attorney to file his ballot challenge and was told no. He then sought the esteemed Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

    Slartibartfast: Interesting point. Considering Zullo had to go to over 200 expert document examiners before finding Reed Hayes, there’s bound to be some birthers who sought competent legal advice and gave up before they found someone who would just tell them what they wanted to hear.

  22. avatar
    Slartibartfast November 13, 2013 at 3:45 pm  (Quote) #

    So the question is whether it is more common for a birther to keep trying competent lawyers until they give up or do they eventually restrict themselves to the handful of lawyers who already share their bias. Somehow, I suspect the latter…

    Reality Check:
    I believe Brooke Paige in Vermont tried to hire a real attorney to file his ballot challenge and was told no. He then sought the esteemed Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

  23. avatar
    nbc November 13, 2013 at 4:19 pm  (Quote) #

    The pdf shows JBIG2 encoding… Which explains why some people may see identical letters… Some people would have confused this with forgery… Ironic, isn’t it… It also shows evidence of OCR…

    Oops…

  24. avatar
    bob November 13, 2013 at 4:47 pm  (Quote) #

    Bob:
    Does the judge have any obligation to respond to Mr. Vogt?If not he should just file the Vogt-thingy under Sour Grapes.

    Does the judge have an obligation to “discharge” Vogt’s potential criminal liability and refer this to a grand jury? No.

    But this was filed, so the court does have a duty to adjudicate it. Which it will: the court will dismiss Vogt’s filing for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

  25. avatar
    aarrgghh November 13, 2013 at 4:53 pm  (Quote) #

    Slartibartfast: … there’s bound to be some birthers who sought competent legal advice and gave up before they found someone who would just tell them what they wanted to hear.

    i’m reminded of this 2009 thread at freeper gulch:

    uncle sham: We need to focus this thread on looking at all avenues of approach as it pertains to legally charging, convicting, and removing elected officials who refuse to obey their oath of office to the Constitution itself. What can they be charged with and how best should these charges be brought? If we did this nation-wide, it would have a larger impact than the Tea parties.

    ——

    atom smasher: I suggest 2010 because I haven’t been able to find any attorneys here, in Michigan, who think my case is valid. I have quoted areas of the Constitution that we all know have been violated, but I’m told that it isn’t enough to prove wrong doing.

    … If you can find legal help in your state, please ping me & I will get a hold of your legal people, and ask them if they can recommend anyone to us here in Michigan. Surely these attorneys will know others like them.

    Like I said, these were Const. Attorneys, or so they say. It was like I was talking to a wall. I even went as far as approaching a law professor at the University I attend, to see if they would consider taking this on….no go!

    So let us all know what legal institution or firm you get in with, and maybe they can direct us in who to talk to in our states.

    “… or so they say.” heh.

    ah … good times.

  26. avatar
    realist November 13, 2013 at 5:08 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

    Piffle, over at Fogbow named it a Tattle Tome.

    🙂

  27. avatar
    RanTalbott November 13, 2013 at 6:48 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing

    I propose “ovosugogogy”: an attempt to teach one’s grandmother to suck eggs. It sounds vaguely lawyer-ish, and, like the WH PDF, it has layers: there’s a hidden condescension in the mixing of Lating and Greek.

  28. avatar
    CarlOrcas November 13, 2013 at 7:09 pm  (Quote) #

    Slartibartfast:
    How about pseudo-legal wachamathingy?

    How about……crap?

  29. avatar
    Bob November 13, 2013 at 7:14 pm  (Quote) #

    Legal Litter.

  30. avatar
    Matt November 13, 2013 at 7:56 pm  (Quote) #

    Vogt wrote:

    “The Clerk of the Court, after initially refusing to file Vogt’s Notice of Commission, renamed it a “Complaint” and collected the full filing fee. 1″

    (Footnote 1 is a request to have the filing fee refunded should the Court find the Clerks action improper)

    Vogt seems to have missed these two simple sentences from the FRCP:

    Rule 2: There is one form of action–the civil action.
    Rule 3: A civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court.

  31. avatar
    Jim November 13, 2013 at 8:47 pm  (Quote) #

    bob:
    Also: Taitz claims to know who Vogt names as the forger;

    “however I do not know the full extent of involvement. I will not be disclosing the name as I was requested not to do so.”

    Yeah, like she knows how to keep someone’s name secret, just because she was asked. Good thing I bought the “HEAVY-DUTY ANTI-TAITZ” meter!

  32. avatar
    Benji Franklin November 13, 2013 at 9:30 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

    The typical Birther legal initiative is sort of a cred-establishing garment which every big-time Birther wanna-be must piece together in their spare time, and zip themselves into if they want to make money from the Obama haters.

    So how about calling these turkeys, “Leisure Suits”?

  33. avatar
    G November 13, 2013 at 11:16 pm  (Quote) #

    ROTFL! Good one.

    RanTalbott: I propose “ovosugogogy”: an attempt to teach one’s grandmother to suck eggs. It sounds vaguely lawyer-ish, and, like the WH PDF, it has layers: there’s a hidden condescension in the mixing of Lating and Greek.

  34. avatar
    RanTalbott November 14, 2013 at 12:11 am  (Quote) #

    Benji Franklin: And you’re right that we never heard about them, I bet.

    Well, we heard about Zullo going to Woodall. Most of it had to hear about it secondhand, though, because ORYR buried the tape when they realized what had happened. Which is understandable: the matter-antimatter explosion from having that much reality on their site could have blown it to smithereens.

  35. avatar
    Rickey November 14, 2013 at 12:35 am  (Quote) #

    Reality Check:
    I believe Brooke Paige in Vermont tried to hire a real attorney to file his ballot challenge and was told no. He then sought the esteemed Mario Apuzzo, Esq.

    In a recent thread here Brooke Paige acknowledged that he had to settle for Mario because he couldn’t find anyone else to take his case.

  36. avatar
    Lani November 14, 2013 at 12:49 am  (Quote) #

    Well, that was fun! What’s next? We need more funnies…. and popcorn.

  37. avatar
    Rickey November 14, 2013 at 9:28 am  (Quote) #

    My question is this: once this case is dismissed, does the material which Vogt filed under seal become unsealed?

  38. avatar
    The Magic M November 14, 2013 at 10:18 am  (Quote) #

    I would guess not. Otherwise a company filing a lawsuit with sealed confidential internal materials would risk exposing such materials to the public once the case is dismissed.

  39. avatar
    Rickey November 14, 2013 at 11:22 am  (Quote) #

    The Magic M:
    I would guess not. Otherwise a company filing a lawsuit with sealed confidential internal materials would risk exposing such materials to the public once the case is dismissed.

    Yes, but this isn’t a lawsuit, so I don’t know that the normal rules apply. Perhaps the Court will just return everything to Vogt.

  40. avatar
    JPotter November 14, 2013 at 11:32 am  (Quote) #

    Benji Franklin: The typical Birther legal initiative is sort of a cred-establishing garment which every big-time Birther wanna-be must piece together in their spare time, and zip themselves into if they want to make money from the Obama haters.

    So how about calling these turkeys, “Leisure Suits”?

    I like the idea of birfer manifestos as dress-up … and the dated sleaziness of leisure suits … empty suits? Refer to them as just another pile of gray flannel.

    Empty Chair beats empty suit every time 😉

  41. avatar
    Kiwiwriter November 14, 2013 at 12:52 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I struggle with finding a word to describe this thing. I’ve toyed with:

    Suit
    Action
    Something (or thing)
    Presentment
    Filing
    Complaint

    Nothing really fits.

    How about “Legal whining?”

  42. avatar
    Rickey November 15, 2013 at 1:57 pm  (Quote) #

    Vogt is now soliciting PayPal donations so he can send his pile of excrement to “over 600” Federal judges.

    If the judge in Seattle does not act as he should we intend to mail the complaint to other Judges around the county until we find one Federal Judge that sees what Barack Obama is doing to the country and also wants to get him legally out of office before he destroys the country and turns it into a socialist hell. So if you can contribute to our ends please do so. It will cost $26 to mail the complete filing in color to a Federal Judge. There are over 600 Judges.

    Because there is nothing which Federal judges like more than to have something filed in their court which has already been adjudicated in another Federal court.

    http://obamaforgerybook.com/?utm_content=buffer7e19e&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Buffer

  43. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy November 15, 2013 at 3:02 pm  (Quote) #

    $26 sounds like the cost of FedEx delivery. The filing fee for a federal lawsuit is $350, so I think he’s not intending to file these as lawsuits.

    What he’s talking about now (with judge) is a more reasonable approach, but sending it to 600 is plain silly.

    Rickey: Vogt is now soliciting PayPal donations so he can send his pile of excrement to “over 600″ Federal judges.

    Because there is nothing which Federal judges like more than to have something filed in their court which has already been adjudicated in another Federal court.

  44. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy November 15, 2013 at 3:15 pm  (Quote) #

    I see Vogt is calling himself a “typographer” now.

  45. avatar
    Daniel November 15, 2013 at 3:24 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I see Vogt is calling himself a “typographer” now.

    He can call himself a Macaroni and Cheese Dinner, for all the good it will do him.

  46. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG November 15, 2013 at 4:01 pm  (Quote) #

    And he’d be one of those really crappy ones, like Always Save brand!

  47. avatar
    JPotter November 15, 2013 at 4:41 pm  (Quote) #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I see Vogt is calling himself a “typographer” now.

    How rude to those of us who have tackled typography professionally!

    Fits right in with his daytime MO … claiming titles w/ wild abandon. Historian, biblical expert, archaeologist … classic crank behavior! Back in the day, he’d be peddling to rubes from a wagon.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.