Grinols hearing this morning

Posted on April 22, 2013 by Dr. Conspiracy

An important hearing is scheduled this morning in the case of Grinols v. Electoral College. Oral arguments will be heard on motions to dismiss. You can read more about what’s going to happen today in my article, “Things heat up for Monday face-off in Grinols.” Interested parties are expected to attend the hearing and a special edition of Reality Check Radio will report on the hearing tonight at 9:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time. The Fogbow Boots on the Ground™ thread  for the Grinols hearing has been created for reports from attendees. The hearing is expected to be over by noon Pacific Time (21:00 UTC). Orly Taitz is reprinting a number of letters purporting to be from military officers (presumably retired) urging judge England to hear Taitz’s case “on the merits.”  (I am reminded at this moment by the movie, Dr. Strangelove.) Taitz says in one article that there are 17 letters in all. Of course, the Judge cannot hear a case that he lacks jurisdiction to hear no matter what her fans may want. In the mean time, Taitz seems focused on reprinting every right-wing spin on the Boston Marathon bombing: “Is FBI trying to create a ‘lone wolf’ scenario to cover up involvement of others who trained and financed these 2 Muslim terrorists?” Taitz has been at the forefront of repeating rumors and irresponsible speculation on this story. Read more:

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in Lawsuits, Orly Taitz and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Grinols hearing this morning

  1. john says:
    April 22, 2013 at 10:03 am  (Quote)

    Obama like bombs. Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber. Has Obama found a new friend?

  2. Reality Check says:
    April 22, 2013 at 10:25 am  (Quote)

    The will be also be a special edition of Reality Check Radio at 9 pm ET with reports on the hearing. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rcr/2013/04/23/rc-radio

  3. Reality Check says:
    April 22, 2013 at 10:36 am  (Quote)

    Thanks for link and mention Doc.

  4. JJolly says:
    April 22, 2013 at 10:49 am  (Quote)

    Orly Taitz is reprinting a number of letters purporting to be from military officers (presumably retired) urging judge England to hear Taitz’s case “on the merits.”

    I can promise you thery’re not active duty. Not everyone is as foolish (or as in his case, as stupid) as Lakin.

  5. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:
    April 22, 2013 at 11:18 am  (Quote)

    My prediction of Orly’s performance today: SCREECH! LET ME FEEENISH!
    My prediction of Orly’s post-loss reaction: SCREECH! JUDGE AM TREASONOUS!

  6. The Magic M says:
    April 22, 2013 at 11:28 am  (Quote)

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: My prediction of Orly’s performance today: SCREECH! LET ME FEEENISH!

    Actually, Orly rarely dares speak up in front of a judge because she’s afraid of actual physical sanctions (instead of just monetary ones). She only dares call judges traitors on her blog or sometimes in filings. I’ve yet to see her make a “if you don’t decide to my satisfaction, you’re a traitor” comment to a judge’s face.

  7. Rickey says:
    April 22, 2013 at 12:39 pm  (Quote)

    Orly is typical among those with Obama Derangement Syndrome in that she immediately believes any negative rumor about him.

    The reality is that the Boston bombers show all the earmarks of being lone wolves. They had no money, no vehicle, no getaway plan. They didn’t bother to disguise themselves and it apparently never occurred to them that it would be relatively easy to identify them.

  8. john says:
    April 22, 2013 at 1:20 pm  (Quote)

    “Of course, the Judge cannot hear a case that he lacks jurisdiction to hear no matter what her fans may want.”

    As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

    In many legal cases, the judge is the trier of fact and the law. Depending upon the issue or politics at hand the judge himself or herself will FIND certain nuances of the law to make the case go forward. That’s why law is a practice, there is no clear cut answer. The judge can FIND the evidence or conclusion and it then ultimately up to an appeals court to determine if the ruling is right. But, an appeals court always gives deference to the trial court judge.

  9. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    April 22, 2013 at 1:37 pm  (Quote)

    That’s not what judges do. It is the burden of the Plaintiffs to show standing and jurisdiction. That’s basic law.

    john: As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

  10. Birther Weary says:
    April 22, 2013 at 1:55 pm  (Quote)

    john: The judge can FIND the evidence or conclusion and it then ultimately up to an appeals court to determine if the ruling is right.

    I guess we can do away with lawyers completely then, since it’s up to the judge to do all the heavy lifting.

  11. Jim says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:01 pm  (Quote)

    john:
    “Of course, the Judge cannot hear a case that he lacks jurisdiction to hear no matter what her fans may want.”

    As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! So you think if I sue your butt, it’s up to the Judge to find a reason to find you guilty and give me what I ask for? You are sooooooooooo silly John!!! 😀

  12. J.D. Sue says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:03 pm  (Quote)

    john: The judge can FIND the evidence or conclusion and it then ultimately up to an appeals court to determine if the ruling is right. But, an appeals court always gives deference to the trial court judge.

    —-
    First of all, the Judge cannot “FIND” evidence on a motion to dismiss. Indeed, on a mtd, a judge can only determine the law, not the facts. In order to determine the law, the judge must assume that all of plaintiffs facts are true, and thereby determine whether the case nonetheless must be dismissed as a matter of law (e.g., no jurisdiction, no standing, mootness, etc.)

    Second, the appeals court Never gives deference to the trial court on a question of law.

  13. W. Kevin Vicklund says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:04 pm  (Quote)

    john: As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

    In many legal cases, the judge is the trier of fact and the law. Depending upon the issue or politics at hand the judge himself or herself will FIND certain nuances of the law to make the case go forward.

    Not in Federal court. A judge might be lenient on certain procedural issues, but not only must plaintiffs prove they have standing, a judge is obligated to determine whether the court has jurisdiction even if defendants don’t raise it as an issue.

    You’d think that john would have accidentally made a correct statement about how the courts work by now. You’d be wrong.

  14. richCares says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:11 pm  (Quote)

    “You’d think that john would have accidentally made a correct statement”
    .
    even a broken clock….!, but john is no clock

  15. J.D. Sue says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:33 pm  (Quote)

    john: As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

    —
    Therein lies your problem. The Judge’s duty is to constitutional law, not Orly-law. The Judge cannot constitutionally exercise jurisdiction he does not have.

    Similarly, as far as Orly and her supporters go, you have also been calling for the military to arrest the President, i.e., engage in a military coup. But the military’s duty is to the Constitution, not Orly-law.

  16. nbc says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:39 pm  (Quote)

    john: As far Orly and her supporters go, it is Judge England’s duty to FIND jurisdiction to hear the case.

    Actually, the Judge will likely just dismiss for obvious reasons. You do understand such issues as standing and jurisdiction?…

    Well, the Judge approved… And promptly dismissed according to the ‘boots on the grounds’ in the case.

    Another one bites the dust…

  17. Bob says:
    April 22, 2013 at 2:46 pm  (Quote)

    John,

    Does the judge have to provide snacks for the plaintiffs too?

  18. donna says:
    April 22, 2013 at 3:17 pm  (Quote)

    Bob:

    John,

    Does the judge have to provide snacks for the plaintiffs too?

    LOLLIPOPS

  19. alg says:
    April 22, 2013 at 3:40 pm  (Quote)

    Bob:
    John,

    Does the judge have to provide snacks for the plaintiffs too?

    CROW

  20. MN-Skeptic says:
    April 22, 2013 at 5:50 pm  (Quote)

    john:
    Has Obama found a new friend?

    Last I looked, he had almost 66 million friends, 5 million more than Rmoney.

  21. US Citizen says:
    April 22, 2013 at 6:33 pm  (Quote)

    MN-Skeptic: Last I looked, he had almost 66 million friends, 5 million more than Rmoney.

    http://disappearingromney.com

  22. The Magic M says:
    April 23, 2013 at 5:50 am  (Quote)

    john: Depending upon the issue or politics at hand the judge himself or herself will FIND certain nuances of the law to make the case go forward. That’s why law is a practice, there is no clear cut answer. The judge can FIND the evidence or conclusion and it then ultimately up to an appeals court to determine if the ruling is right.

    Says someone with NO idea how the law or the courts work.

    Sure, the judge first makes a “political” decision how he wants to rule, then makes up reasons to rule for the side he favours and hopes the appeals court does not catch him. Rigggghhhttttt….

  23. Kate1230 says:
    April 23, 2013 at 8:27 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: Says someone with NO idea how the law or the courts work.

    Sure, the judge first makes a “political” decision how he wants to rule, then makes up reasons to rule for the side he favours and hopes the appeals court does not catch him. Rigggghhhttttt….

    John and all the other so-called “patriotic” birthers love to speak of how they are only interested in governing according to the Constitution & the rule of law. However, when a judge does use the Constitution as they have in the 200+ cases brought by birther attorneys, they whine and cry about the mean, old Judge who is definitely corrupt.. The birthers apparently think their vast legal knowledge, especially when represented by Orly Taitz, ESQDDSBBQ, along with her “daffydavids” & other supporting “ebidense” far outweighs any decision by a member of the judiciary who has sat on the bench for 30 years or more. Birthers are impatiently waiting for the day that Orly Taitz is appointed to the Supreme Court so her special kind of legal justice can finally be attained, let the frogmarching and hanging by the gallows begin!

  24. Plantmaster says:
    April 23, 2013 at 5:04 pm  (Quote)

    john:
    Obama like bombs. Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber. Has Obama found a new friend?
    *************
    And what does this have to do with Grinols?

    If you’re going to repeat discredited nonsense, John, at least stick to the subject of the post!

  25. Plantmaster says:
    April 23, 2013 at 5:06 pm  (Quote)

    richCares

    “You’d think that john would have accidentally made a correct statement”
    .
    even a broken clock….!, but john is no clock
    *************
    John made a correct statement last week—when he admitted that he knew nothing…

  26. misha marinsky says:
    April 23, 2013 at 5:16 pm  (Quote)

    john: Obama like bombs.

    More than Cheney, or the same as Cheney?

    john: Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber.

    Best friend? Source, other than gossip and innuendo? All charges against Ayers and his wife were dropped. No conviction, no crime.

    BTW, Sarah Palin gave tacit approval to clinic violence, in an interview with Brian Williams. McCain, sitting next to her, agreed.

    john: Has Obama found a new friend?

    Yeah – Bo, a gift from Ted Kennedy.

  27. misha marinsky says:
    April 23, 2013 at 5:17 pm  (Quote)

    Kate1230:John and all the other so-called “patriotic” birthers love to speak of how they are only interested in governing according to the Constitution & the rule of law.

    Denialists are fascists, in the actual meaning.

  28. Dr. Conspiracy says:
    April 23, 2013 at 9:04 pm  (Quote)

    I just wanted to comment that the Boots on the Ground reports (linked in the article and below) are quite extensive and interesting (even though not a lot really happened).

    http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=112&t=9374&p=499000

  29. J.D. Sue says:
    April 24, 2013 at 2:43 am  (Quote)

    misha marinsky: Best friend? Source, other than gossip and innuendo? All charges against Ayers and his wife were dropped. No conviction, no crime

    —
    Being from Chicago, this always makes me laugh and shake my head. Bill Ayers, his brother, and his wife Bernardine Dohrn are well established and well known authorities in education and youth issues here in Chicago, and sit on many expert panels and boards around town. Indeed, it would be hard to imagine how Obama could have been active in the community here without sitting on at least one board with one of them. Nobody here considers them particular controversial. Of course, in Birtherstan, Chicago is often spoken of as a foreign enemy state… In contrast, here, we call Chicago “the Heartland” of America. Go figure.

  30. Rickey says:
    April 24, 2013 at 11:01 am  (Quote)

    john:
    Obama like bombs.Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber.

    Bill Ayers on his relationship with Obama: “I think my relationship with Obama was probably like thousands of others in Chicago. And, like millions and millions of others, I wish I knew him better.”

    That doesn’t sound very much like a “best and closest friend.”

    The guilt by association thing didn’t work in 2008, it didn’t work in 2012, and it doesn’t work now.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/04/AR2008110404171.html

  31. nbc says:
    April 24, 2013 at 11:04 am  (Quote)

    john: Obama like bombs. Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber. Has Obama found a new friend?

    John is getting pretty desperate in smearing our President.

    Poor John, so powerless… So ugly and so poorly informed. The ideal tea party supporter…

  32. sfjeff says:
    April 24, 2013 at 12:24 pm  (Quote)

    john: Obama like bombs. Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber. Has Obama found a new friend?

    Just when I thought Birthers couldn’t sink any lower, or be any more despicable….they manage to fool me again.

  33. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:
    April 24, 2013 at 12:39 pm  (Quote)

    john:
    Obama like bombs.Remember, his very best and closest friend is none other than Bill Ayers, the unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber.Has Obama found a new friend?

    John, you despicable sack of crap.
    Let this be the last thing I every say to you:
    May your life end with you swallowing the barrel of your own gun. P.S. Don’t take anyone with you.

  34. JD Reed says:
    April 24, 2013 at 3:21 pm  (Quote)

    Rickey: Bill Ayers on his relationship with Obama: “I think my relationship with Obama was probably like thousands of others in Chicago. And, like millions and millions of others, I wish I knew him better.”

    That doesn’t sound very much like a “best and closest friend.”

    The guilt by association thing didn’t work in 2008, it didn’t work in 2012, and it doesn’t work now.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/04/AR2008110404171.html

    John: There’s absolutely no evidence for what you assert about Obama and Ayers, so you can’t possibly know that what you said with no equivocation whatever is true. So heed the words of Abraham Lincoln:
    “I believe it is an established maxim in morals that he who makes an assertion without knowing whether it is true or false, is guilty of falsehood; and the accidental truth of the assertion, does not justify or excuse him.”

  35. Sef says:
    April 24, 2013 at 3:25 pm  (Quote)

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: May your life end with you swallowing the barrel of your own gun.

    Of course, Joker Sarnof couldn’t even pull that one off right.

  36. J.D. Sue says:
    April 24, 2013 at 3:30 pm  (Quote)

    JD Reed: John: There’s absolutely no evidence for what you assert about Obama and Ayers, so you can’t possibly know that what you said with no equivocation whatever is true. So heed the words of Abraham Lincoln:

    —

    In follow up, to make it simpler: John, Stop bearing false witness!!!

  37. Rickey says:
    April 24, 2013 at 7:03 pm  (Quote)

    J.D. Sue: —

    In follow up, to make it simpler:John, Stop bearing false witness!!!

    John recently converted to Catholicism. I hope that they made him study the Commandments.

    Catholics aren’t big on the Old Testament (at least in my experience), but there also is this:

    Exodus 23:1 New King James Version (NKJV)

    “You shall not circulate a false report.”

    I continue to be fascinated by the number of self-professed Christians on Facebook who gleefully re-post every negative rumor they hear about Obama without ever taking a minute to check and see if it is true.

  38. JD Reed says:
    April 24, 2013 at 7:52 pm  (Quote)

    Rickey: John recently converted to Catholicism. I hope that they made him study the Commandments.

    Catholics aren’t big on the Old Testament (at least in my experience), but there also is this:

    Exodus 23:1 New King James Version (NKJV)

    “You shall not circulate a false report.”

    I continue to be fascinated by the number of self-professed Christians on Facebook who gleefully re-post every negative rumor they hear about Obama without ever taking a minute to check and see if it is true.

    Rickey, sadly, I’ve witnessed a bit of this.

  39. misha marinsky says:
    April 24, 2013 at 8:00 pm  (Quote)

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: John, you despicable sack of crap.

    John, you ignorant slut.

  40. Northland10 says:
    April 24, 2013 at 8:46 pm  (Quote)

    J.D. Sue: —

    In follow up, to make it simpler:John, Stop bearing false witness!!!

    John likes 2 Timothy 4:3 better;

    For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

    Which requires an appropriate response to John:

    misha marinsky: John, you ignorant slut.

    That’s it.

  41. The Magic M says:
    April 25, 2013 at 4:08 am  (Quote)

    Rickey: I continue to be fascinated by the number of self-professed Christians on Facebook who gleefully re-post every negative rumor they hear about Obama without ever taking a minute to check and see if it is true.

    Bigots always see those invisible footnotes nobody else can see.

    The Ten Commandments are optional as long as you can say “it doesn’t say I shouldn’t lie about Satan”.
    The Constitution is optional as long as you can say “those Boston bombers aren’t people, they’re demons, so no Miranda rights for them”. (Read the other day on the account of a “conservative” on Twitter.)

  42. Lupin says:
    April 25, 2013 at 4:17 am  (Quote)

    Speaking as an atheist, I’m always astounded at the sheer villainy of those who profess to believe in a God. Obviously belief as a way to instill goodness is a very imperfect code.

  43. misha marinsky says:
    April 25, 2013 at 7:44 am  (Quote)

    Lupin: Speaking as an atheist, I’m always astounded at the sheer villainy of those who profess to believe in a God.

    Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

    Steven Weinberg – http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Steven_Weinberg

    I stopped believing when I was 16.

  44. The Magic M says:
    April 25, 2013 at 8:29 am  (Quote)

    misha marinsky: I stopped believing when I was 16.

    I used to “talk to Jesus” until I was about 18, but it was more like talking to an imaginary friend, not an actual religious practice. Call it a spleen. I also used to talk to an imaginary computer, pretty much like Iron Man talks to Jarvis.
    I don’t know when I stopped “believing”, but it must’ve been before that.
    I only got to despise religion (except Buddhism) when I realized how many idiots base their inhuman ideals on it. So basically when I started using the internet back in 1995.

  45. Lupin says:
    April 25, 2013 at 11:52 am  (Quote)

    The Magic M: I used to “talk to Jesus” until I was about 18, but it was more like talking to an imaginary friend, not an actual religious practice. Call it a spleen. I also used to talk to an imaginary computer, pretty much like Iron Man talks to Jarvis.

    In my case even as a small child I could never bring myself to believe the inherent absurdities of the Christian faith; I never could get past the dogma.

    I think there are about 3000 gods that ever were worshipped in human history; the difference with most of my fellow christians is that I don’t believe in 3000 of them while they don’t believe in 2999; I can live with that.

  46. Rickey says:
    April 25, 2013 at 1:45 pm  (Quote)

    The Magic M: I used to “talk to Jesus” until I was about 18, but it was more like talking to an imaginary friend, not an actual religious practice.

    I talk to my cats. They don’t talk back to me, but they at least respond to my voice.

  47. Kiwiwriter says:
    April 26, 2013 at 12:50 pm  (Quote)

    When the Jehovah’s Witnesses come to our home, we tell them we’re Jewish. When the Lubavitchers and the Chassidim jump in New York and try to wrap me in tefillim to bring the Messiah (while reading the New York Post), I tell them I’m “Church of England.”

    Either way, they leave us alone.

    Now, when that guy said the rapture would take place last May, my wife and daughter made a wooden sign that said, “Goodbye, everybody, I’ve gone to join the rapture,” and placed empty clothing next to it, all on our lawn, and people stared at it in amazement, laughter, and horror…I remember the two Latina women both staring at it and shaking their heads, faces shocked.

  48. misha marinsky says:
    April 26, 2013 at 10:39 pm  (Quote)

    Kiwiwriter: Now, when that guy said the rapture would take place last May, my wife and daughter made a wooden sign that said, “Goodbye, everybody, I’ve gone to join the rapture,” and placed empty clothing next to it, all on our lawn,

    Brilliant. Sounds like something I would do.

    Here’s another religious nut case, around the corner of my building:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/ubereye/3611738524/in/photostream

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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