February 16, 201610 yr As Americans we don't do things because they are easy, we do things because they are hard Or because they need to be done, in spite of how hard they may be.
February 16, 201610 yr Well, it's now past 3:30 PM. I sure hope the day is not going to go by without any word from the courts. (And Dwight, of course that remark is aimed at the courts, not at you.)
February 16, 201610 yr Pardon my being simple when it comes to these types of things, but what happens if the court epic fails to respond by the allotted amount of time?
February 17, 201610 yr This is worse than Christmas! I hate waiting to open my presents. Hate to say it, but the likelihood is that this is going to be more like getting a lump of coal.
February 17, 201610 yr Pardon my being simple when it comes to these types of things, but what happens if the court epic fails to respond by the allotted amount of time? Usually? They ignore the fact they broke the rules and give you the bird when they finally get around to it.
February 17, 201610 yr Thank you for the update!! Been wondering and thinking this thread was due for a bump!
February 17, 201610 yr Author Hi All, I probably did not make two points clear. First: The court does not call a press conference or even make a public announcement. Remember they refused to allow anyone to be present when they make the ruling. This means that Judge Shipp probably does nothing more then send his paperwork to the court clerk who will post it into the electronic digital system. Since they wanted NIck to pay $1,200.00 for the privilege to send and receiving court papers and we did not have the money for that, Nick will be notified by mail. I asked Nick if he could call the court and he said that they most likely would not give that info over the phone. He has his meeting with the Assemblyman today at 9:30am. After that, if the Assemblyman does not have the ruling info, Nick will try to call the court. Anything we find out we will post here right away. Second: We fully expect this court to rule against us. As we have said many times, they will find some underhanded trick in support of the dismissal, one that will not have any legal bite to it. This will be plugged into our appeal which is ready to go except for the fact that we don't know yet the reason Shipp will give for the dismissal. On another point, Scalia's untimely death is not good news for our case. Even if the Republicans hold strong and wait for the next president (which I hope will be Trump) to appoint there is a certain amount of worry that the new Justice will be what we hope or expect. (RE: Souter-Roberts, both Bush family appointees) That's all for today. Will keep you posted. Promise! Dwight & Nick
February 17, 201610 yr Hi All, I probably did not make two points clear. First: The court does not call a press conference or even make a public announcement. Remember they refused to allow anyone to be present when they make the ruling. This means that Judge Shipp probably does nothing more then send his paperwork to the court clerk who will post it into the electronic digital system. Since they wanted NIck to pay $1,200.00 for the privilege to send and receiving court papers and we did not have the money for that, Nick will be notified by mail. I asked Nick if he could call the court and he said that they most likely would not give that info over the phone. He has his meeting with the Assemblyman today at 9:30am. After that, if the Assemblyman does not have the ruling info, Nick will try to call the court. Anything we find out we will post here right away. Second: We fully expect this court to rule against us. As we have said many times, they will find some underhanded trick in support of the dismissal, one that will not have any legal bite to it. This will be plugged into our appeal which is ready to go except for the fact that we don't know yet the reason Shipp will give for the dismissal. On another point, Scalia's untimely death is not good news for our case. Even if the Republicans hold strong and wait for the next president (which I hope will be Trump) to appoint there is a certain amount of worry that the new Justice will be what we hope or expect. (RE: Souter-Roberts, both Bush family appointees) That's all for today. Will keep you posted. Promise! Dwight & Nick thanks man! also...as mentioned above....record the conversation. nj is a 1 party state, making it perfectly legal for him to record the entire thing, without telling them that he is.
February 17, 201610 yr Author NOTICE on the lawsuit ruling. They once again did not rule. No notice, no statement, no digital filing. Nick called them today, the court clerk had no comment and refused to let him talk to the Judge's Clerk. Clearly the court fears making a ruling as they know they will be included in the appeal and then will have to support it. Thanks, Dwight Plus....... Response to the gentleman who wants Cruz. I'm not about to get into a back and forth over who is best for President. Except to say if we are supporters of the Constitution, we must support all of it. Whether or not it suits us. Please check out this video. If you still think Cruz is eligible, that will be your prerogative. https://vimeo.com/154765379 If this link doesn't work here you can see it on the front page of www.tpath.org Again, we are all on the same side of most issues and for sure there will be disagreements on some things. I have spent much time looking into Article II since before Obama was elected. I am convinced that both Cruz and Rubio are ineligible. Like I said, this topic is not meant for this discussion and I don't think we should tie it up with this issue. Please email me at [email protected] and we can discuss it a bit more or you can give me reasons why you disagree with the professor in the video Linked here.
February 17, 201610 yr I have to admit i'm losing track...at what point is someone/defedants in contempt(?) for not moving forward or ruling??? Also I'd politly suggest removing the Trump/Cruz stuff or we'll lose this thread....but it is your thread.
February 17, 201610 yr Nick and Dwight, this may be an inside joke. But you are obviously making waves. My previous is what our friends are dealing with
February 17, 201610 yr I have to admit i'm losing track...at what point is someone/defedants in contempt(?) for not moving forward or ruling??? Also I'd politly suggest removing the Trump/Cruz stuff or we'll lose this thread....but it is your thread.The court will never find itself in contempt. Ergo 30 day for permits.
February 17, 201610 yr Has a hearing been scheduled by the 3rd Circuit Court for the Writ of Mandamus? Gotta believe there are some behind-the-scenes conversations going on about that one...
February 17, 201610 yr Stop it Zeke. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Lol, from my experience with other genres this is what happens.It's like a playbook. I'll say this, if you rule out the impossible, then anything else is possible. I'm at a disadvantage cause I'm missing the probable part, it's been a long day
February 18, 201610 yr Leave the gop politics outa this! Sounds like sappa is stirring the pot. Good for you guys! im sure you guys have a long road ahead of you, and I'm sure regardless of trump Cruz or Arthur, you have most of our support. Keep it goin!!!
February 23, 201610 yr Author Hey All, We prepared an update in the form of an online report. It is too long to post here. Please follow this link to the SAPPA pages to see it. See the report here http://www.tpath.org/what-are-they-afraid-of-.html This is a tough struggle. But we have a tough guy taking on these ideologues. The court would love to put this case to bed. But they appear scared to take the step. Thanks all, Dwight
February 23, 201610 yr Hey All, We prepared an update in the form of an online report. It is too long to post here. Please follow this link to the SAPPA pages to see it. See the report here http://www.tpath.org/what-are-they-afraid-of-.html This is a tough struggle. But we have a tough guy taking on these ideologues. The court would love to put this case to bed. But they appear scared to take the step. Thanks all, Dwight Thanks for the update Dwight! Was there ever a meeting as you described in an earlier post with an assemblyman?
February 23, 201610 yr Author Yes, the meeting took place. Nick has asked that we keep the details of this under wraps a bit longer as there is now under way an effort, as a result of that meeting, to meet with a very high ranking official in Christie's administration. Please be patient on this. They may be blowing smoke, but we need to take every opportunity that may present itself. Thanks, Dwight
February 23, 201610 yr they're blowing smoke, trying to delay more. thank you guys for the hard work, and for the updates.
February 23, 201610 yr Is there any limit on how long they can postpone? Whatever happened to expedient trial ?
February 23, 201610 yr Dwight Thanks for the update. Also thanks to you and Nick for fighting the fight God bless
February 25, 201610 yr You guys do not appear to be foolish so you do know that the words, " They may be " should be changed to ' They are ' That being said you need to see where that path may lead to. I read your report.......one thing, one tiny suggestion.......the document has no need for the following types of commentary, " Probably quicker than Bill Clinton could scan a room full of cheerleaders." Should this ever make it to prime time, those types of writings, those types of silly comments, do nothing to further the case or agenda. In my honest opinion it cheapens what you are trying to do and as such can be used against you. Maybe not procedurally, but surely perceptively by the public...just a thought. Also where this is all going to be one is in the perceptions of others....... Besides, Bill Clinton would stare with that creepy uncle look on his face for a long time in a room full of Cheerleaders. No Quick scans there...
February 25, 201610 yr Author Silly comments!!!! Please notice if you will, the article I shared with you and this forum is not nor will it ever be part of any official record. This post was taken from the TPATH website where you will find many articles on various subjects. While we strive there to provide precise and accurate information it is imperative that our work is not purely clinical. As we need to be sure the reader is a little entertained and a little surprised. So fear not, when and if we need to submit a legal brief or report to a court we are very capable of doing so. If you doubt this, please check out the motions, letters and briefs we have submitted to the court over this past year. Those documents would put most people to sleep if they had not already reached for the mouse after the first few paragraphs. I suspect that would include you too. I do appreciate your suggestion but I think I'll continue writing for TPATH in the manner that has brought us 20 thousand unique visitors a week. Dwight Kehoe Editor of www.tpath.org
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.