A most curious article title [Link to Taitz site] appeared on the Orly Taitz blog a few days back. It said: “Update: I talked to attorney Mario Apuzzo, he stated, he will assist as much as he can.” I could hardly let that pass without comment.
I must admit that the first thought that came to mind was “poor Mario.” Partnerships with Taitz tend to go badly because she exhibits no respect for the other party and has no concept of confidentiality (like posting on the Internet that she had talked to Apuzzo). Taitz and Berg are involved in a messy lawsuit, former client Connie Rhodes said she was going to file a bar complaint against Taitz because Taitz filed actions on behalf of Rhodes without authorization, a major feud erupted between her and her co-counsel Gary Kreep, and now Taitz is petitioning the court to issue sanctions against her co-plaintiff Leah Lax in Mississippi. Apuzzo, on the other hand, seems arrogant and dismissive of others. There would seem to me to be a distinct personality conflict.
Apuzzo, for his part, has largely ignored Taitz on his blog except to note once that an article on her site is something that he actually wrote. On the other hand Taitz did mention Apuzzo in a substantive way, criticizing him [Link to Taitz web site] for that silly article saying that Obama was really Bari Shabazz and the son of Malcolm X.
Usually in a collaboration, one plays upon the strengths of the other. In this case we have one attorney whose evidence (copied from the Internet) has been rejected by multiple courts and another whose legal theories have been labeled as “without merit” by others. I don’t see that as a combination for success. Any bets as to how long it will take Taitz to add Apuzzo to her RICO complaint?
It will be interesting to see who changes their ideas, Orly or Mario.
After Minor, in 1898, there was a case called Wong Kim Ark regarding a young man who was born in this country, went with his family to China, came back, and was denied citizenship. There, the judge stated that because he was born in the United States to parents who were residents and intending to reside in the country, he is considered a citizen and could be president one day.”
From a reprint of a Post and E-Mail article.
Orly says that Minor was a voting rights case and the citizenship portions are dicta.
My bets are on Orly, if any of the two. Mario has held a single opinion (Vattelism) for years and is unlikely to deviate from it. Orly, OTOH, would have no problem selling her grandmother if it meant another shot at the “usurper”; she’s a typical “the ends justify the means” birther who will gladly claim the opposite of what he claimed yesterday, as long as it appears a better argument against Obama.
Perhaps Mario was just being nice? Taitz would never recognize being shined on.
You’re probably right.
By the way, I want to apologize to the participants of the “Birthers drop non-racist pretense” thread for not trying to enforce the blog rules against personal attacks, which ran rampant in the discussion.
Obama should be careful facing these two. Will this be the case where defense counsel is sanctioned for ROTFLTAO?
If so, you’re also, right, only a matter of time before Orly adds him to the RICO case for his ‘betrayal’ (read: his failure to give a blunt refusal … which would also get him added to the RICO case!), and calls out the Flying Monkey Death Squad. (Scramble those IPs, Mario!)
There’s just no winning with the Taitz. 😉
I was not impressed by Mr Apuzzo before it all started, but having read that thread….. he doesn’t take criticism at all well, does he, and one wonders how he survives in the law courts. He must lose non-birther cases occasionally, and know how the system works?
Anyway, he came across as the opposite of charming!
Add Mister Mind and Dr. Sivana and we have the Monster Society of Evil.
There really is little point in responding to Apuzzo. He ignores direct questions which only require direct answers, he still refuses to acknowledge that his claim about a Pakistan travel ban was totally fallacious, he will not say who or what is financing his repeated failures in court, and when he does respond he responds with puerile insults which are increasingly tiresome and lame.
How about something this simple: with Charles Edward Lincoln Town Car Mark III out of the game, Orly is looking for someone birfoon hawt for The Dental Chair Of Love, someone who doesn’t mind that the whispers and moans are “usurper… Kenyan… Mom-bas-aAAAAHHHH!!!”
Orly is trying to add a plaintiff to her Mississippi case – a Romeny elector from Minnesota. This is the one who said he might not vote for Romney/Ryan unless they showed him their birth certificates. His legal advisor was Mario, so that may be the Orly/Mario connection.
That is my take on it. The Motion to Intervene does not have Mario’s name on it, but in September the intervenor (James Grinols, a doctor in Minnesota) identified Mario as his attorney.
The rules state that an interested party can be allowed to intervene if the existing parties cannot adequately represent his or her interest, but the motion does not even try argue that is the case in regard to Grinols’ interest. Now, if he had argued in his motion that his interest can’t be adequately represented because Orly is bat-guano crazy, he might get somewhere.
oh this is going to be such high comedy!
the short bus now has 2 drivers!
As a pediatrician, the Minnesota elector could provide another source of funds for sanctions. I wonder if he’s aware of the risk?
“Update: I talked to attorney Mario Apuzzo, he stated, he will assist as much as he can.”
Assist implies “help” of some sort and what Orly needs is an intervention or a lobotomy or a straightjacket or a real job or years and years and years of shock treatments.
Orly probably drove the Tesla while drunk.
I attended my Tea Party tonight. Next week Larry Klayman will be attending my Tea Party. He will there along with new Florida Congressman Ted Yoho. He will be talking about the Treason presentment that has been handed by an Ocala, Florida Citizen’s Grand jury related to Obama. Klayman will also be talking about the eligibility issue. It’s great that Ted Yoho will be there. He is a new Congressman. Although, I am quite dubious of any court proceeding having any success against Obama at this point, It is my hope that Ted Yoho might think about filing a written objection with the Joint Session of Congress when it meets in January. Klayman then only needs to have one senator to sign on and Obama is stopped in his tracks. While I can’t gauranttee a positive result, Obama will be put through the meat grinder when try to go to certify the vote.
You go, john! Sounds like you’re doing your part! It’s bound to work this time!
Of course, the House and Senate would vote them down, meaning they lose political points for nothing. How does that help, again?
This is one time I agree with you. Please send my hope to Yoho.
Help us, Yoho-Wan Kenobi; you’re our only hope!
In response to John’s stale, uninteresting stupidity: “Any. Day. Now.”
Congrats. And good job going with a classic opening. Simple, clear ….. who what where when. A good start for any 1st-grade essay.
Rockstarz! Did you score backstage passes? Will there be magic tricks?
Oooh, a two-fer! Appearing together, or just happen to be there at the same time? I will refrain from Yoko Ono references.
Who? Klayman or Yoho? Will there be video???
Well, duh, what else would he talk about? Nevermind, please don’t answer. Just tell me there’s gonna be video!!!
You already said that! Where’s the freakin’ video link?!?
You “hope” that he “might think”???? What the heck? Why so wishy-washy? Put some spine in it, man!
Ummm….Klayman is emcee at the Joint Session? Wow. How’d he score that?
I think you’re oversimplifying a bit there.
So, back to that video you’ll be shooting for us ….
Ted Yoho? Is he the guy who invented the chocolate drink? Be sure to ask him about that.
♪Yoho, Yoho, a birfer’s life for me…♪
OMG You mean the Larry Klayman?!!! and the topic will be Obama’s eligibility!
Actually, Larry Klayman’s topic is- and always will be- “How can Larry Klayman profit from gullible Tea Partiers?”
I seriously think John is an Obot troll. There is no way a grown up man/woman can be this delusional.
He remains a mystery wrapped inside an enigma wrapped inside a buffoon.
Did they bother to impartially select a jury or was it just another “birther volunteer” enterprise? Or, as I like to call them, a lynch mob?
Yes, any day now. You forgot to attach some classic birfer memes to that, like “Obama is sweating bullets” or “Michelle threw a temper tantrum in the Oval Office” or something like that. Are you getting tired?
I highly doubt a new congressman is going to make waves as soon as he’s a member of congress.
Then again, I’ve seen Michele Bachmann.
But if someone can answer this question below, I’d appreciate it.
Is a congressman sworn in before the president, after or at the same time?
If either of the latter two, Mr. Yoho won’t be able to do anything.
I also very much doubt any senator is going to raise questions.
No John, I think you’re going to have to get used to Obama for the next 4 years.
But I hope you pass your time with silly tea parties and citizen grand juries.
While not constructive, at least they’re not destructive.
Senator Barbara Boxer when first elected in 2004, immediately filed a objection to Bush winning the election. Although her objection was overruled, Senator Boxer got a tremendous amount of support from her supporters. Boxer received over 5,000 roses for Valentines’s Day from her supporters. If Yoho decides to object and can get a Senator to go along with him, Yoho will get a tremendous amount of applause and support. Klayman will be discussing the presentment that has been handed by a Grand Jury in Ocala, Florida. Here is a copy – http://www.citizensgrandjury.com/pdf/121101-Citizens%20Grand%20Jury%20Indictment.pdf
The Presentment involves military treasonous charges against Obama and Biden specifically dealing the death of Seal Team 6.
john: Obama will be put through the meat grinder when try to go to certify the vote
I’ve got $1000 says nothing will happen whatsoever, and the vote will be certified immediately.
Be a man for once. Get some skin in the game. Take the bet, or STFU.
Hitchens called Bachmann, “a crackpot.”
If a written objection is filed, Congress is constitutionally and legally required to consider it. They must DEBATE the objection. Congress CANNOT IGNORE it. While I can’t garrantee a positive result especially with the Senate, it appears Larry Klayman is trying to reach to Congressmen and hopefully Senators to file one. Court action at this point to hopeless and a written objection with the Joint Session of Congress may our last hope in stopping Obama.
Going on memory, the new Congress is sworn and assembled first. One of the first orders of business is, handling the electoral college. The rookies are already in process of transitioning. …. and they will be sworn on 1/3/13.
There’s already a Wiki for Congress version 113.0:
Just to note, Boxer was first elected senator in 1992.
Do you have a link to the “debate” that took place in response to the 2004 objection. It must have been quite a debate, because, as a result, President Kerry is winding up his second term now. Wait, what’s that you say????
John “:Court action at this point to hopeless and a written objection with the Joint Session of Congress may our last hope in stopping Obama.”
And your last hope has less of a chance than a single molecule of a snowflake in Hades.
I guess she was just ahead of her time in objecting to Bush’s election twelve years later.
Really, are all birthers this reality challenged? No need for a response; the answer is obvious.
I note that you did not say that you attended your local Tea Party meeting, or that Klayman and Yoho will be attending your local Tea Party meeting. Thus, I assume that you are referring to an actual tea party you had, presumably with your Care Bears, My Little Ponies and Smurfs. I also assume that no actual tea was in the cups, as you probably are not allowed to handle hot liquids.
When Senator Boxer joined Representative Jones to challenge the certification of Ohio’s Electoral College votes in 2004, the Senate and the House voted down their objection by overwhelming numbers. Even most Democrats voted against her. If an objection is raised in this election cycle, I believe we’ll see the same results.
Nobody in Congress has moved for impeachment in the past 4 years. What makes you think they’re gonna be on your side this time?
john, obviously in yours and larry’s haste to find your president guilty of something, you overlooked the simple fact that the SEALS killed in afghanistan were not the SEALS that took out bin laden.
and how would they identify a seal team in a helecopter to know which one to shoot down? they don’t paint `seal team 6′ on the side of it! this isn’t the a-team you know!
this information has been in the public domain since it happened, but is suppose birfoon blinker syndrome hit yet again
What you fail to understand is that only the dumbest of people (you) and the dumbest Congresscritters think there’s anything to this. That there’s anything to “uncover.”
Everyone else knows there isn’t. Everyone else knows BHO was born in HI, and is a Constitutionally eligible NBC.
Everybody, John. They all realize that a thorough investigation would discover that there is not a single item of argument or proof to BHO being ineligible, and those starting the investigation would just look like fools. The way Trump looks. The way Orly looks.
The way you look.
You have signed on to a program of self-humiliation, a project I am thrilled to assist you with.
You claim BHO will be “put through a meat grinder.” That implies an investigation, which I have $1000 says will never happen.
Go ahead, tough guy. Take the bet. We’ll work out the details later.
So….does this mean you will finally give up this insanity if your last hope is squashed like every other Birther hope and dream has been?
John reminds me of this guy in high school who was totally hung up on this one girl- lets call her Sally.
This guy would talk to me incessantly about Sally every time I saw him- but Sally, other than being polite, never had anything to do with him.
At my 25th high school reunion- he saw me and came up and started to talk to me about Sally- who was happily married, with children, living in another state and apparently had not talked with him in the 25 years since high school.
He was still sure that they were destined to be together.
What’s he going to say about it, John?
Do you think it has any meaning? Any validity?
Was Alice there?
John this may be useful to you,
“Can electoral votes be contested when Congress counts the votes in January?
Under federal law an objection to a state’s Electoral votes may be made to the President of the Senate during Congress’s counting of Electoral votes in January. The objection must be made in writing and signed by at least one Senator and one member of the House of Representatives. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives debate the objection separately. Debate is limited to two hours. After the debate, both the Senate and the House of Representatives rejoin and both must agree to reject the votes.
In January 2005, Ohio’s 20 Electoral votes were challenged. After debate, the Senate and the House failed to agree to reject the votes. Ohio’s 20 Electoral votes for President Bush and Vice President Cheney were counted.
So even if you get one Senator and one Representative to object, you would then have to get both the Senate and the House to reject the Electorial College vote. If that is your last hope, you’re screwed.
John, are you aware that these Citizen Grand Juries are no more suited to prosecute criminal matters than my nephew with his “Let’s Play Doctor!” dress-up play kit is suited to practice medicine. You can’t just get together with a bunch of your buddies and say “we iz prosecuterz now! you iz gilty and yoo iz goin’ to jail!” and expect that to have the same weight as district attorneys employed by the government. It’s the 21st century for Christ’s sake!
John somehow believes that either
(a) the following “debate” in Senate and House (which in reality will likely consist of an immediate motion to close the debate) will lead to enough Congress members suddenly going birther, or
(b) the following “debate” (see above) will give birtherism enough publicity for the public to listen to and accept their twisted views.
Neither of which is going to happen in this universe, but hey, birthers still believe all they need is “just one honest [whoever]” when in reality none of the many public figures going birther (in part or full tilt) have resulted in any public outcry “march on DC” or “civil war” or whatever it is they are after.
The Ocala Star-Banner ran a photo of that Tea Party:
Is this a new case?
Of her 4 plaintiffs with “perfect standing”, none were actually on the general election ballot. Judd was the guy who got 40% in the West Virginia Democratic primary, another is some Republican “candidate” I never heard of, one lost the American Indpendent Party nomination and one is Orly, who isn’t eligible herself.
You hit the nail on the head. They’re aspiring to what they really want to be:
A Kangaroo Court, then a Lynch Mob.
John: citizen grand jury?
haven’t we experienced this mishegas before?
5/2010: Rev. James David Manning Trial Results in Guilty Verdict for Obama and Former Columbia Univ. President on Various High Crimes Including Fraud
May 20, 2010):
“REPORT (by Neil B. Turner)
The Honorable Bob Unger presiding
I have just returned from the Trial of the Centuries, wherein the Jury has just returned the Verdict of the Centuries, against the perpetrators of the greatest Crimes of the Centuries: GUILTY on all counts (including Election Fraud, Obstruction of Justice, Disclosure of State Secrets, and Sedition) – against a former Columbia University President and its Board of Trustees, and Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro!
these people would probably be rejected for “cause” in a real grand jury
Citizen Grand Juries boggle my mind. I mean, all of Birtherism is stupid, but I just cannot comprehend anyone believing a Citizen Grand Jury had any actual power. When I was a kid, I played a game called “Hot Dog and Sir” with my little brother. I was “Sir”, a stern and authoritative Army sergeant, and he was a bumbling private named “Hot Dog”. But see, even though we were children with ages in the single digits, we still knew that we weren’t actual soldiers and didn’t have the authority to, like, go to war.
What? You can’t give us a guarantee? Are you suggesting that deadbeat dad Larry Klayman doesn’t have influence on the Hill?
John wants what he can’t even spell.
John, I’m going to do you a favor.
When you write a post, do you ever see a word with a red underline?
That means that whatever you wrote is not in the dictionary.
Words like “Klayman” are not in the dictionary because they’re proper nouns.
However words like “guarantee” are a common noun and almost always in the spell-checking dictionary.
When you see the word “garrantee” with a red underline it means you’ve spelled that word incorrectly.
Additionally, debates are only Constitutionally required if there’s a difference of opinion and usually several members are opposed.
But if no one objects, they don’t go to debate and even if one senator or congressman objected, it’s highly likely unlikely a debate would be entertained.
You see, most of congress, reps and other high level meetings start out with a vote.
If everyone or most everyone decides against an objection, they’ll likely to be overruled and no debate will take place.
We call this “majority rules.”
It’s the same reason Obama was elected and reelected.
More people voted for him than Romney and we’re talking millions of people which makes election fraud highly unlikely.
You just don’t have a pot to piss in.
Nor likely a dictionary or any history books either.
John still uses the Netscape browser… no spell-check
Plus both caucuses of both houses have a strategy session before the house session to ratify the vote of the electoral college. Each party decides what it’s party line is, and if there is to be an objection, it will be decided which senior member will raise it and which group of senior members will support raising the objection. Any junior member from backass springs who thinks he can just up an object ’cause he doesn’t like the look on Obama’s face is going to get put in place by the majority/minority Whip faster than he can say “but… but he’s a mooslim!”.
You forget we’re talking actual insanity here (not just boilerplate insanity as “it’s insane to pollute the air we breathe”).
This is the audience that thinks a fringe on a flag in a courtroom has (significant) legal meaning, or that putting funny characters in your name exempts you from paying taxes, or that the country ceased to exist 200 years ago.
Then of course there’s those to which this just provides an opportunity to vent their anger and “feel powerful”. Like shaking your fists at the TV screen yelling “coward!” and then thinking “hey, I really told that Klitschko guy off, I’m a brave man!”.
Donna: only probably?
“these people would probably be rejected for “cause” in a real grand jury”
Methinks certainly is a more accurate modifier.
Hey John and Mario:
I got your citizen grand jury right here.
I say we empanel a Citizens’ Grand Jury of Fogbowers, indict John, Mario and Orly, hand down convictions for treason, effect Citizens’ Arrests, and hand them over to the proper authorities for detention and/or execution.
Of course, we would be greeted with howls of derision and arrested for false imprisonment. But hey, we would have shown THEM who’s boss!