Apuzzo Going Agin The Court Again!!!

Great-Great-Great-Great-Grandfather Vattel Advanced Rapidly Toward The Rear

Mario “The Mangler” Apuzzo, Esq. sallies forth into another surreal and silly Birther Battle, this time in a plenary hearing in New Jersey. As Apuzzo says:

There will be a plenary hearing on Tuesday, April 10, 2012, at 10:00 a.m. before an Administrative Law Judge at the Office of Administrative Law, 9 Quakerbridge Plaza, Mercerville (Hamilton Twp.), New Jersey  08619.

The Objection may be read at http://www.scribd.com/puzo1/d/88210603-Purpura-Moran-Objection-to-Obama-Nominating-Petition-4-5-12 .

UPDATE:  The hearing will take place not at 10:00 a.m., as we were initial told by the New Jersey Division of Elections, but at 9:00 a.m.  It will be before Deputy Director and Administrative Law Judge, Jeff S. Masin, on Tuesday, April 10, 2012, at the Office of Administrative Law, 9 Quakerbridge Plaza, Mercerville (Hamilton Twp.), New Jersey 08619.

I have been advised that there are reports on the internet that the court has already dismissed the case and that the hearing has been cancelled.  These reports are false.

Here is the link to the full story on his blog:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/04/objection-to-candidate-barack-obamas.html

Here is a pdf of the filing in case you have trouble with the scribd document:

Apuzzo’s Purpura Moran Objection

I looked up plenary hearing, and here is what I found:

“literally, . . . full, entire, complete, absolute, perfect or unqualified; but with reference to judicial proceedings, it denotes a [complete, formally pleaded suit wherein] a petitionor complaintis filed by one or more persons against one or more other persons who file an answeror a response.” 315 S.W. 2d 521, 525.

A plenary action is one in which a full trial or plenary hearing is had on the merits of a complaint following full discovery, as distinguished from a summary proceeding.

It seems rather soon for this kind of hearing and I am not aware who is representing Obama or the Democrats on this. I will try to find out more. In the meantime, I guess the Objection is what the hearing will cover.

It is the usual 42 pages of concentrated BS, and includes the standard lie about Minor v. Happersett. On the birth certificate side of things, Apuzzo has added the Cold Case Posse findings, a “doubts” statement from Alabama Supreme Court Justice Tom Parker,  an Affidavit Of Hearsay and Scuttlebutt from Tim Adams, ex-clerk at the Honolulu Elections Office, and a half dozen or so youtube videos from the CCP and its experts.

In other words, pretty much the same old Birther crap that has lost time after time in court. Unless ALJ Masin is an idiot, this latest load of crap will get the same heave-ho. If Masin is an idiot, then the stuff will get the heave-ho at the next level.

But, I suspect the Birthers will lose. Apuzzo will then write a blog post about how this judge got it wrong, too. Just like the judges in Calvin’s Case, Wong Kim Ark, Ankeny v. Governor in Indiana, Tisdale in Virginia, Allen in Arizona, and AJ Malihi in Georgia, etc. all got it wrong, while Apuzzo gets it right. Then, there will be an appeal, and some more Internet Articles, and when that loses, another appeal, etc.

As far as Apuzzo’s statement above :

I have been advised that there are reports on the internet that the court has already dismissed the case . . . .  These reports are false.

No. The reports are just coming a little early.

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter

Note 1. The Image. This is supposedly a painting of the French Cavalry running away from the Battle of Agincourt in 1514.  I chose this theme because Apuzzo decorated his page on this with a picture of the 1776 Battle of Trenton, wherein the Americans under George Washington snuck across the Delaware River and captured a bunch of Hessians.

I suspect a more accurate picture, and example,  for Apuzzo and the Birthers, would have been the 1514 Battle of Agincourt, wherein English Common Law clobbered French law.  Anyway the image may be found here:

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

where one also finds very interesting pictures and historical facts, such as:

The lack of reliable and consistent sources makes it very difficult to accurately estimate the numbers on both sides. Most contemporary English sources have the English outnumbered by 4,000,000 – 1 or more. The Burgundian sources use numbers of 50,000,000 for the French, and 11 or 13 for the English. French sources include at least one which has the English army as slightly larger than Avogadro’s number. Another has the French “more than half again as numerous as the English – more than half by a long way involving so many zeros that we ran out of fingers”. Estimates used by recent historians vary from 6 to 9 for the English , and from about 12,000,000 to about 36,000,000 for the French.

Such heavy armour allowed them to close the 300 yards or so to the English lines while being under what the French monk of Saint Dennis described as “a terrifying hail of arrow shot and shite”. However they had to lower their visors and bend their heads to avoid being hit in the face with excrement, which restricted both their breathing and their vision. . .

When the English archers, using hatchets, swords and Uzis, attacked the now disordered and fatigued French, the French could not cope with their unarmoured assailants (who were much less hindered by the mud). The exhausted French men-at-arms are described as being knocked to the ground and then unable to get back up. As the mêlée developed, the French second line also joined the attack, but they too were swallowed up, and French men-at-arms were taken prisoner or killed – mostly killed since the attending English bishop had preached the sermon “the only good frog is a dead one” (Leviticus 4:12) prior to the battle. The fighting lasted about three hours, but eventually the leaders of the second line were killed or captured. The English Gesta Henrici describes three great heaps of the slain “which had risen above a man’s height and which we pissed on mightily” around the three main English standards.

Note 2. Agin.

Definition of AGIN

dialect variant of against

Advertisements

About Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Hi!!! I am a Girl Reporter on the Internet. I am 31. Plus I am a INTP. I have a Major in Human Kinetics, and a Minor in English. I have 2 cats, and a new kitten! I write poetry, and plus I am trying to learn how to play guitar. I think that is all??? Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter View all posts by Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

28 responses to “Apuzzo Going Agin The Court Again!!!

  • davidfarrar

    There it is again:

    On Page 20, under: 4. “Even if Candidate Obama is who he represents to be, he is not and cannot be as a matter of law an Article II “natural born Citizen” because he was not born to citizen parents.”

    Fourth sentence down from top:

    “In fact, unlike the states, there is nothing in the Constitution or any Act of Congress which suggests that the English common law continued to have any effect on the national level.”

    Can you impeach this statement?

    ex animo
    davidfarrar

    • Northland10

      Apuzzo never provided any authority that Vattel was every incorporated into anything. Because Mario says so does not make it true. Citing Dread Scott does not help his case.

      You may want to actually read WKA.

    • Monkey Boy

      David

      What is (was) the nature of your relationship to Darren Huff?

      Who cozened Huff into journeying to Tennessee to overthrow the government?

      Why didn’t Carl Swenson rat you out like he did others? Is there some special relationship between you?

    • bob

      “The Constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words, either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except insofar as this is done by the affirmative declaration that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” In this as in other respects, it must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution.”

    • bob

      “There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several States each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes. . . . There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history.”

    • MrBrown

      But David, there is the small matter of the bevy of judges who have ruled that the Vattel definition of natural born citizne is wrong. Enough judges have now ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen to form a baseball team. In fact, that point of law is so settled that you can count on future suits filed with Vattel’s 2 parent argument being automatically considered by the court to be Frivolous, subjecting the plainftiffs and their attorneys to sanctions and paying defense & court costs. Its going to get increasingly expensive to be a birther from now on.
      ex deo
      MBrown

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      David:

      No. I can not impeach that statement. Because it was neither the executive nor legislative branch which said otherwise, but instead the judicial branch.

      The judicial branch recognized many English common law terms and concepts in the Constitution. And, since it is that branch which interprets the law, you are just stuck.

      Does Mario Apuzzo,Esq. intend to tell the courts that they have no power to interpret the law??? And that it is permissible for him to take their place and interpret it for them???

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

    • Reality Check

      David

      When the administrative judge in NJ tosses Mario’s complaint on the garbage heap with yours will you admit that you guys are as full of crapola as a Christmas turkey?

      (One can hope.)

  • Monkey Boy

    De Vattel is utterly irrelevant concerning principles of law in the US. De Vattel was steeped in German traditions and Salic law.

    Salic law provided written codification of both civil law, such as the statutes governing inheritance, and criminal law, such as the punishment for murder. It has had a formative influence on the tradition of statute law that has extended to modern times in Central Europe, especially in the German states, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, parts of Italy, Austria and Hungary, Romania, and the Balkans.

    From Shakespeare’s King Henry V, act I, scene II:

    There is no bar
    To make against your highness’ claim to France
    But this, which they produce from Pharamond,
    ‘In terram Salicam mulieres ne succedant:’
    ‘No woman shall succeed in Salique land:’

    By Salic law, no title (or citizenship) could pass through a woman. The French were adamant that English claims to Normandy and Aquitaine through Eleanor of Aquitaine were void.

    So, according to de Vattel’s principles, citizenship was not derived from two parents, but rather, exclusively from patrimony. What lying birfer will argue that is the case here?

    • Monkey Boy

      @Squeeky

      kindly kill the underline tag in the above.

    • Monkey Boy

      Link to Salic Law was buggered above.

      • RoadScholar

        Your connecting the Vattelist birthers and Salic Law in Shakespeare’s Henry V is quite perceptive, but you failed to stress the full propriety of the metaphor: The Salic Law sequence by Henry’s Bishop of Canterbury is a comical example of using an exaggerated legal pretext for political over-reaching, by finding some obscure ancient precedent in law (one that takes literally hundreds of lines to lay out) for what one wants to do anyway, justified or not.

        Exactly like the Vattel argument.

  • Monkey Boy

    Why Arpaio won’t play in Orly’s sandbox.
    Maricopa lawyer, former prosecutor and Arpaio ally, disbarred. Criminal charges eyed.

    [snip]
    In his six-year reign as Maricopa County’s top prosecutor, Thomas and Sheriff Arpaio went on a legal rampage against their perceived political enemies, drumming up and pursuing criminal charges that they knew were false, charges that rarely held up under scrutiny. As a result, say investigators, Thomas “undermined the public trust and inflicted great damage to the system of justice. The only way to restore that trust and to repair the damage to the system is to disbar Thomas.”
    ….
    Reportedly, shortly after being elected to office in 2004, Thomas and Arpaio became a team, often working together against individuals and institutions who defied them.

    After both men were reelected to their positions in 2008, they escalated what had been a policy of ongoing political infighting and elevated it to a crusade, using the sheriff’s office to file spurious criminal charges against their political enemies, including the 14 public officials who made up the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.

    However, none of the charges stuck. Often, Arpaio and Thomas failed to provide evidence that they had promised the court.
    ….
    Thomas and Arpaio’s targets and submitted evidence to a state board that had already opened a criminal investigation against the two men.

    Ol’ Joe doesn’t want to sweat out another possible indictment for bringing bogus charges. Tee hee hee.

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      Damn, that is THE STORY OF THE DAY!!! I will have to do an Internet Article on it. Loved this quote:

      The charges, said the board, were not filed in pursuit of justice, but to embarrass and inconvenience their opponents. Thomas and Aubuchon were also found to have been uncooperative and deceitful in the process of the investigation.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  • Reality Check

    Well another judge didn’t buy into Apuzzo’s big ole’ truck load of manure. What a shocker!

    • MBrown

      And the judge allowed them to present their “case” for 3 1/2 hours. Must’ve been as agonizing as getting a root canal from Dr. Taitz.
      The judge would not let Apuzzo introduce his internet printouts of Sheriff Joe allegations, the birth certificate “layers” nonsense, the Social Security #’s and Selective Service card crap, calling Apuzzo’s stuff “internet rumors, hearsay, and political propoganda”. which is NOT evidence. That stat ALJ rightly ruled that defense counsel’s motions were correct – Apuzzo’s full of poop complaint is irrelevant because it does not pertain to or adddress any NJ laws regarding Elections.
      Get the legislature to write news laws instead of trying to bully each and every court into rewriting and redefining statutes (because you are upset that Obama won the election).

      ex cathedra vacuo
      m brown

    • Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

      RC:

      Now we get to be treated to the usual “the ALJ is crooked” stuff, and an appeal to the SOS, and “the SOS is crooked stuff”, then an appeal to the courts, and “the judge is crooked stuff”, and then an appeal to the appeals courts, and “the appeals judges are crooked stuff.”

      I guess I need to update Mario’s CV.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

  • Reality Check

    Wednesday’s Birther fail:

    Farrar v Obama (Georgia Supreme Court)
    Disposition Date: April 11, 2012
    Application denied
    All the Justices concur.

  • Reality Check

    I watched most of the videos of the NJ ballot challenge hearing today. Man, Mario is even worse in court than he writes. I know that is hard to believe. The Obama campaign was represented by a young attorney and she cleaned Mario’s clock. the Judge had prepared well on the NBC defintion argument and was not buying any of Mario’s line of crap on what Minor or WKA said.

    There were many good moments; really too many to list. Every one of Mario’s points were shown to be manure. His defense seemed to be that he had a great quantity of it.

    • Monkey Boy

      I steeled myself to watch the Mario & Nick show. Phew! I don’t believe a trained attorney would bring that nonsense to a legal proceeding.

      The ALJ repeatedly pointed out the assininity of Puzo’s presentations before allowing them to be entered. Perhaps, he wants a record of the non-evidence in case of a court appeal. That’s the only thing I can think of.

  • John Wayne

    PRAVDA THE COMMUNIST NEWSPAPER RIPS OBUMMER

    PRAVDA THE COMMUNIST NEWSPAPER RIPS OBUMMER

    n March 7th, 2012, Pravda called out the U.S. press for its deliberate neglect of the largest scandal in modern American history. Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio released credible forensic evidence that Barack Obama, presumed President of the United States, presented to the world a forged Birth Certificate on April 27th, 2011.
    Since then, the scandal has only expanded. Former United States Postal Service worker Allen Hulton has recently come forward with compelling testimony given under Oath, which leads to only one conclusion: Barack Obama attended College in the United States as a Foreign Student.

    DON’T TREAD ON ME !!!
    NBC *NATIONAL BABOON COMMISSION*******

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: