misc.legal

"Stephen" <stephend152000@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:op.t3s9zqxopthgv3@jq0arm4.myhome.westell.com... >I would like to invite speculation about why discourse on this board is so >venomous. I would like to invite you to @$#* off. RSVP.

I would like to invite speculation about why discourse on this board is so venomous. [Could someone explain in a paragraph what this matter of "Pangborn" concerns?] Most participants have little interest in the law, so what attracts hostile natur

"Deadrat" <a@b.com> wrote in message news:TrEbj.34620$Pv2.31830@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net... > "Robert Miller" <xyzstargazzr@windstream.net> wrote in > news:18e0c$476ebf36$471f67f9$14161@ALLTEL.NET: > > > > > "Deadrat" <a@b.com> wrote in message

On Dec 24, 12:46 am, Dane Metcalfe <quackde...@gmail.com> wrote: > Smith v. Kitchen > > 97-1237 > December 12, 1997 > > 156 F.3d 1025 (10th Cir. 1997) > > Quote: > > Smith's final contention of error involves his complaint that the > district c

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 23:24:51 GMT, Stephen <stephend152000@yahoo.com> wrote: >I would like to invite speculation about why discourse on this board is so >venomous. [Could someone explain in a paragraph what this matter of >"Pangborn" concerns?]

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 20:37:02 -0800 (PST), Greegor <Greegor47@gmail.com> wrote: >Rog > That video alone shows who's pool it is. > >Yeah, because NOBODY could ever fake a video, right Roger? Please offer evidence to support your innuendo that the

In article <22cb33b9-6b49-47c9-bc08-43123a2ff9b1@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > Do you think that John Suthers is running a vacant office? > > > > Before I can answer this question, I want you to define for me what

Smith v. Kitchen 97-1237 December 12, 1997 156 F.3d 1025 (10th Cir. 1997) Quote: Smith's final contention of error involves his complaint that the district court should have responded to his argument that by captioning its documents "UN

> > Yes. They would be without authority except for emergency procedures > > to immediately kick into place preventing that. > > Where do you get this from? =A0What statute or constitutional provision? That is basically the 25th Amendment but it h

On Dec 23, 11:26=A0pm, Larry <x...@y.com> wrote: > In article > <2dd5107c-d6d1-4586-8a42-ef00fc623...@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > > =A0esaupha...@gmail.com wrote: > > > So let's say, for argument's sake, that the office is vacant. =A0 > > > Va

In article <0ea95a85-85d0-427c-89c5-03b4bd9bf16f@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > "We are lawyers in the United States of America. As such, we have all > taken an oath obligating us to defend the Constitution and the ru

> Again, I ask you: suppose the president is assassinated, or cannot > fulfill his other duties for some reason. =A0Now suppose it is a few hours= > before the Vice President is sworn into office. =A0There is no President > for those few hours; the

"Lt Gen Al E. Gator" <Al@CrocsBiteaBillyToday.com> wrote in message news:FsIbj.610$pA7.602@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > > "tankfixer" <null@null.org> wrote in message > news:MPG.21d8ba3e4f7a72129897ef@nntp.earthlink.net... >> In article <5t7td

n article <b306461d-af15-4cf2-b2c9-255431a02814@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > "Yes, I do. Sorry to break it to you, but I do. I was appointed by > the DA to serve as an ADA, and there is no question that at the time

> So let's say, for argument's sake, that the office is vacant. =A0 Vacant means empty. I do not think I need to make any legal or other determination about what that means. An empty office means it is void. No valid prosecution could commence f

Although collars are generally thought to be for the canine kind, many cat owners choose to purchase collars for their favorite felines. There are many different kinds of cat collars on the market, so it is imperative that you choose the best option fo

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 17:29:14 -0800 (PST), Dan Sullivan <dsulldan@optonline.net> wrote: >Not one "Who's Who" in a google search produces the name Keneth >Pangborn!!! Did you search under "Who's Who of pathological liars"? I would expect him to b

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:33:07 -0800, tankfixer <null@null.org> wrote: >In article <5t7tdnF1bri09U1@mid.individual.net>, theprof@jonez.net >says... > >nothing..... That's the norm for Jonez. If he isn't plagiarizing someone's work, he's posting

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:59:34 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: >Kent Wills wrote: >> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 01:31:50 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _" >> <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>>> There was no mention of Cam in that p

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 01:29:19 +0100, freedom <aboutKRPken@aboutISkenApangbornFRAUD.com> wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007, " krp" <web2457k@verizon.net> wrote: >>DAVID DIPSHIT MOORE >>"freedom" <aboutKRPken@aboutISke

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:12:56 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: >Kent Wills wrote: >> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:14:27 -0500, "Dan Sullivan" >> <dsulldan@optonline.net> wrote: >> >>> is that I can't find a SINGLE client of the A-Team

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:30:15 -0500, "Dan Sullivan" <dsulldan@optonline.net> wrote: >On Dec 23, 2:19 pm, Kent Wills <compu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 11:11:16 -0500, "Dan Sullivan" >> >> >> >> <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote: >>

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:47:37 -0600, The One True Roger <love2play@gawab.com> wrote: >On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 15:41:22 GMT, I found that " krp" ><web2457k@verizon.net> Scribbled the following on the bathroom wall: > >> >>"The One True Roger" <love2play

On 23 Dec 2007 16:41:51 -0500, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote: Context restored at no additional charge. >In article <lrctm35654tjvm9npbng0ftmik3el4o16u@4ax.com>, >Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote: >>On 23 Dec 2007 12:46:26 -0500, tjab@

On 23 Dec 2007 17:11:15 -0500, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote: [...] >>Don't resort to your personal refrain, tjab. You asked what >>jurisdiction this is illegal in. Richard quoted the cop who said it was >>illegal in whatever jurisdiction that

On 23 Dec 2007 17:21:27 -0500, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote: [...] >>> That's what Adolf Hitler said too you fascist piece of #@($. >> >>My statement that a police officer tries to enforce the laws is actually >>such a basic premise it shouldn'

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:01:19 -0700, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: [...] >> No, he's trying to enforce the laws. > >That's what Adolf Hitler said too you fascist piece of #@($. Hitler being an idol of yours and all. -- Ke

In article <a8d80cfe-ff1e-419d-b694-4fe3442cb706@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > On Dec 23, 5:13 pm, esaupha...@gmail.com wrote: > > "So now you're saying that if the prosecutor is from a "vacant > office" > the co

In article <a4758a55-b864-436b-a66a-c4519dbdaa91@y5g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > "So now you're saying that if the prosecutor is from a "vacant > office" > the court ceases to exist too, even though that is a separate

In article <7cb4576a-9ec1-4c0f-b898-24d76efab8a3@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > On Dec 23, 4:48 pm, Larry <x...@y.com> wrote: > > > > > > So you're saying that all convictions obtained by Colorado prosecutors > >

Do you think that John Suthers is running a vacant office? > Before I can answer this question, I want you to define for me what a > "vacant office" is and what legal significance this has. =A0Then I will be= > able to answer your question. ".

"We are lawyers in the United States of America. As such, we have all taken an oath obligating us to defend the Constitution and the rule of law=85. We believe the Bush administration has committed numerous offenses against the Constitution and may hav

In article <x-DA326A.18451923122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, Larry <x@y.com> wrote: > > > Try looking at it a different way. Go back to 1996 when I got Suthers > > fired for running a vacant DA office for eight years. A simple Refusal > >

In article <3c1f8795-68e3-4216-90b1-0f693492c0e8@v32g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > First: > > "Personally, I really like how you think all "bar associated" > attorneys > are part of a grand, giant conspiracy." > >

In article <5t7tdnF1bri09U1@mid.individual.net>, theprof@jonez.net says... nothing.....

"Yes, I do. Sorry to break it to you, but I do. I was appointed by the DA to serve as an ADA, and there is no question that at the time he made the appointment he had the authority to do so." I am not sure if you are in Los Angeles or New York but

Thanks for all the replies (except Prof Asshole). For the record, this did not come up because of any problems we are having. I actually forgot exactly, but it related to something we saw on the news. My wife has plenty of stuff in her own name....incl

On Dec 23, 8:29 pm, Dan Sullivan <dsull...@optonline.net> wrote: > Not one "Who's Who" in a google search produces the name Keneth > Pangborn!!! http://tinyurl.com/3ctxkt

In article <x-0A8514.17264923122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, Larry <x@y.com> wrote: >In article <fkmn17$8jd@rac3.wam.umd.edu>, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) >wrote: > >> In article <x-8D3874.17145623122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, >>

Not one "Who's Who" in a google search produces the name Keneth Pangborn!!!

In article <fkmn17$8jd@rac3.wam.umd.edu>, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote: > In article <x-8D3874.17145623122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > Larry <x@y.com> wrote: > >In article <5t7t4hF1c5n5pU1@mid.individual.net>, > > "_ Prof. Jonez _" <

In article <x-8D3874.17145623122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, Larry <x@y.com> wrote: >In article <5t7t4hF1c5n5pU1@mid.individual.net>, > "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: > >> Larry wrote: >> > In article <s6vrm35a86ecu4coeevbu9

In article <fkmme3$8gi@rac3.wam.umd.edu>, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) wrote: > In article <x-50094A.12514923122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, > Larry <x@y.com> wrote: > >In article <fkm60s$6pf@rac1.wam.umd.edu>, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) > >wr

In article <5t7t4hF1c5n5pU1@mid.individual.net>, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: > Larry wrote: > > In article <s6vrm35a86ecu4coeevbu9jpkfinrv136t@4ax.com>, > > richard <spam@google.dom> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:00:30 -

In article <x-50094A.12514923122007@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, Larry <x@y.com> wrote: >In article <fkm60s$6pf@rac1.wam.umd.edu>, tjab@wam.umd.edu (tjab) >wrote: > >> In article <ggfsm3tsutnkn8flormhk1v5bspfouj9e5@4ax.com>, >> Kent Wills <

In article <5fcd07f3-3a99-4c39-a743-14be6e5bd3f7@v4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, esauphacus@gmail.com wrote: > It sounds as though Larry is saying that the Attorney General is not > automatically principal over all the District Attorneys and that is

In article <cf9d1ea7-f7a8-4dbe-b5fd-c379610e5201@l6g2000prm.googlegroups.com>, Dane Metcalfe <quackdeala@gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 23, 11:02 am, Larry <x...@y.com> wrote: > > In article > > <fa47a96e-5f40-467d-b1f4-58b8371c2...@b40g2000prf.googl

In article <5t7tj1F1cl9feU1@mid.individual.net>, "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote: > Larry wrote: > > > > I don't understand > > Typical. Your disingenuous snipping to take portions of a post out of context? Yes, it is quite typ