Main Menu

Archive | November, 2014

The Joe Show: coming to cable

imageThe Investigation Discovery cable TV channel has acquired the documentary, “The Joe Show,” reported Discovery Communications in a press release July 9. In the documentary, Sheriff Joe Arpaio was caught on tape telling his campaign staff that the birther issue will bring in large campaign contributions.

The broadcast is scheduled for 5 PM EST on December 14 on the Information Discovery Channel in an abridged version (14 minutes cut). I have my DVR programmed to record it. It’s also scheduled to be released on DVD on December 16, full-length with bonus features.

Read more:

Strunk something

Christopher Earl Strunk had a court appearance on the 24th of November. An email from him appears at Gerbil Report™ and it provides a narrative of what happened. The problem with this report (and others of its kind) is that it comes from someone who reads things differently than I do, and as a result what he thinks happened or what it means might be different from what I would have understood or reported.

It appears that Judge David Schmidt told Strunk to file default motion if defendants (and there are many) fail to respond in a time adequate for a March 26, 2015 hearing date. Nothing was reported as to what that date might be. The comments about someone admitting something seem to be some sort weird interpretation rather than anything actually said.

The convolutions of multiple cases and judges seems not worth the trouble to try to keep track of. What intrigued me was the statement:

The BHO falsified instrument was presented for the purpose of getting ballot access to the 2012 General Election here in New York as an act of treason against the Constitution for the United States.

What Strunk is saying here is that Obama released his birth certificate to the press in April of 2011 for the purpose of getting ballot access to the 2012 General Election in New York; however, I am not aware of any New York official watching TV or accessing the White House web site in order to make a determination of whether Obama should be on the ballot in 2012 or not.

Taitz offline

Orly Taitz’ blog is offline as of 2:35 PM Eastern Time.

 

image

The 403 error is typically a configuration problem when the page is the home page of a web site. It says that the web server doesn’t have permission to access the requested content. It’s nothing particularly interesting in most cases. What would make it interesting is Orly Taitz claiming that the Obots hacked her, and what would make it even more interesting is her being right.

Update: She’s Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack; however, the last post was 2 days ago, November 25. I still get the 403 error trying to access any individual page.

One interesting article is on the home page from the 24th: “Some comments are in moderation, as I am trying to find time to read lengthy com. Please, write short comments or send them twice. I will release one copy and will have another copy to read when I have time. Note: WordPress doesn’t allow duplicate comments.

Update 2: Down again at 6:47 PM.

Update 3: Now it’s Birther Report with problems. Just got this:

image

Update 4: Taitz still 403 on all but her home page (2:00 PM Eastern time, Nov 28). If you really need your daily Taitz fix, you could try her Facebook page (not to be confused with her other Facebook page whose last post was when her web site was down/hacked almost last June).

Update 5: Still down at 2:53 PM, November 29.

Colmes v. Arpaio

The Fox News Channel has pretty much banned the discussion of birthers on its television network, but that doesn’t apply to Fox News Radio, where the lone liberal, Alan Colmes, has free reign. What happens when Alan Colmes gets to tackle Joe Arpaio, one on one?

Arpaio v. Obama, and other legal stuff

Sheriff Joe Arpaio has not been lucky with attorneys lately.

The Maricopa County Sheriff’s office has been operating under a court-appointed monitor after it was determined that they were guilty of racial profiling. Judge Snow appointed Robert Warshaw as the monitor. According to the Greenfield Reporter,

Snow says he will have Robert Warshaw, who is monitoring the agency on the judge’s behalf, investigate any allegations that he feels the sheriff’s office isn’t examining in good faith.

Warshaw has said his team has never seen more unprofessional interviews than those conducted by Arpaio’s employees who are running the investigation.

Ouch! Judge Snow said in court yesterday (November 21) that Sheriff Joe could be held in contempt of court! Arpaio is appealing the decision by Snow, but he’s run into another snag: the attorney representing him wants out, citing ethics concerns, says the Associated Press:

A lawyer representing Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in a racial profiling case says legal ethics compel his firm to step aside.

As one might expect, no details of what the ethics concern is about were made public, although it was detailed in court filing earlier in the week.

The embattled sheriff is trying to take the offensive, by suing the President over his announced new immigration policy, reports Reuters:

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose force used racial profiling during a crackdown on illegal migrants last year according to a judge, said Obama has overstepped his powers by bypassing Congress and bringing in the changes himself.

I wonder who’s paying the legal bill, and who Arpaio could get to represent him in the case? The second question is easily answered from court filings: Larry E. Klayman. What is a little difficult for me as a layman to determine is whether Arpaio is suing as a private citizen, or as Sheriff of Maricopa County. Arpaio is described in the complaint caption as  “Elected SHERIFF of Maricopa County,” but the complaint does not use the phrase “in his official capacity,” nor does it suggest that the County is a party to the suit. It looks like Arpaio is suing as a private citizen, and that immediately raises the question of standing. In addressing the issue of standing, the complaint states:

27. Plaintiff Joe Arpaio is adversely affected and harmed in his office’s finances, workload, and interference with the conduct of his duties, but the failure of the executive branch to enforce existing immigration laws, but has been severely affected by increases in the influx of illegal aliens motivated by Defendant Obama’s policies of offering amnesty….

The other defendants are Jeh Johnson, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Leon Rodriquez, Director of Citizenship and Immigration Services and Eric Holder, Jr. Attorney General.

Read more:

KPHO Story on Klayman and the suit

The treason of images

The Treason of Images” is one of the translations of the title of a painting by the Belgian surrealist painter René Magritte. For some reason that image came to me during lunch today and I thought of its application to the blog. [If the reader is not familiar with the work, now might be a good time to follow the preceding link to the Wikipedia article to see it.] I might adapt Magritte:

The famous birth certificate. How people reproached me for it! And you, could have you gotten a passport with my birth certificate? No, it’s just a representation, is it not? So if I had written on my picture “This is a birth certificate,” I’d have been lying!

Not a birth certificate

Birthers seem confused about the difference between an object and a representation of it, a photo of it in the case of Obama’s birth certificate. No one in real life confuses the two. You cannot get wet looking at a photo of Niagara falls, but no one complains about this. They don’t curse the image for its dryness. Still birthers get all upset that Obama put a photo of his birth certificate on the White House web site, as if one could put a piece real of paper on the web somehow. (Obama’s attorney did show the actual certified copy—what one calls a birth certificate—to the press who handled it and photographed it. One could get a passport with something like that.)