Is attorney Mario Apuzzo trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat? Perhaps, according to an article in WorldNetDaily yesterday (July 8, 2010).
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied Apuzzo’s appeal in the case of Kercher et al v Obama et al, going so far as to order Apuzzo to show cause why he shouldn’t face penalties for filing a “frivolous appeal” (in a case where his clients lacked standing to bring suit in the first place).
However, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade. In this case Apuzzo wants to turn the penalties themselves into an individual cause of action because of the particularized harm to Apuzzo from the penalties. Says WorldNetDaily:
He told WND he definitely will explore the issue of “standing” now because of the possible penalties, which might be considered an “injury.”
So what’s wrong with this picture? First, Apuzzo is not a party to this lawsuit and any harm to him doesn’t give Kerchner standing. Second, he can’t bring up something in the appeal that was not part of the original suit. The more important issue, however, is that there is no causal link between Obama’s actions and Apuzzo’s pending penalties unless Apuzzo is going to say of his filing the appeal:
Obama made me do it!
PS: if you think you’ve heard this before, perhaps you have. Orly Taitz tried the same gambit in Taitz v. Obama (Page 3).
“Is attorney Mario Apuzzo trying to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat?”
“And so, General, I want to thank you for your service. And I appreciate the fact that you really snatched defeat out of the jaws of those who are trying to defeat us in Iraq.” – George W. Bush to Army Gen. Ray Odierno, Washington, D.C., March 3, 2008
Makes as much sense as Mario Logic.
Spoken like a true statesman.
I think it’s important for me and for you to look for the depth of a person’s soul and character. I was touched by the fact your mother gave you the cross. I was able to get a sense of his soul. – George W. Bush about Vladimir Putin
The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa . – GW Bush
Hey, we know Mario still lurks here, even though he’s been beaten so badly that he dare not post. So, a little help, so he can just cut and paste, from Orly’s Motion for Emergency Stay (of her sanctions) to the USSC:
““Sanctions assessed by Land constitute an irreparable harm to Taitz. Land not only assessed sanctions against Taitz and verbally assaulted and insulted her, but he also submitted his order to the CA bar with the clear intent to undermine her law license and take her livelihood away from her. If sanctions are not stayed and reversed, there will be an irreparable harm to the professional license of Taitz and her ability to earn livelihood.”
“Since Land has forwarded his order to the CA bar, there can be irreparable harm in the form of negative sanctions against her license.”
There ya go Mario! Now you can enjoy the weekend.
Bravo!
He told WND he definitely will explore the issue of “standing” now because of the possible penalties, which might be considered an “injury.”
Mario Apuzzo still is unable to connect the dots. The fine that was imposed was by the courts, specifically the judicial branch. This is a real bizarre leap of logic. “Penalties” are remedies because of an “injury.”
Sanctions assessed by Land constitute an irreparable harm to Taitz. Land not only assessed sanctions against Taitz and verbally assaulted and insulted her, but he also submitted his order to the CA bar with the clear intent to undermine her law license and take her livelihood away from her.
Lawyerwitharealdegree I don’t know what to say, but this is just consistent with the strange logic birthers use. They fail to accept that their behavior is wrong, and then cry “murder” when they are being punished after being given warning. It is a birther defect.
So what’s the most prevalent living species on earth? Birthers?
Had Mario Apuzzo been smart enough to the legal analysis he got right here, he could have avoided his current mess. We had told him his case was so much like others, in particular Berg’s, that the Third Circuit would dismiss it on precedent. He had thought he knew better, but the Court found that the precedents were so clear that Mario’s appeal was frivolous.
Mario: Penalties imposed by the court are for you own conduct. They’re not damages. No one else is responsible. Trying to use them to show particular harm would be a frivolous argument. Orly Taitz tried it; that’s probably where you got the idea. You’ve been re-spinning silly failed arguments of other birthers all along, and by now you really should have noticed that it’s not working.
Mario: In the birther pool, I’ve got you down as being semi-sane and arguing that your suit was a good-faith extension of current law. If you don’t go full retard, I’ll split my winnings with you,
“Orly Taitz tried it; that’s probably where you got the idea.”
Classic Zombie Behavior again! I begining to understand Birther Zombie behavior even better.
Zombie Birther Mario is simply following the the other birther zombie blood trails from the earlier failed cases.
In this case he has detected the blood trail from the “Zombie Orly” cases and seeking “standing” based on the near fatal chain-saw injury inflected by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ zombie defense systems.
The Birther Zombies defense system seeks to only injure the zombie so they wander rather than falling over on court steps creating a mess for others to clean up.
There are several smelly trails he can follow, one goes to the SCOTUS. That one ends in a deadfall trap that crushes the Birther Zombie is called “Denied Without Comment.”
That deadfall trap has a pit so the Birther Zombies rot away out of sight.
misha. I was just there, he had marked your comment as SPAM but I clicked on “Not Spam”.
“He told WND he definitely will explore the issue of “standing” now because of the possible penalties, which might be considered an “injury.”
”
It sounds like Mario is planning to go full retard, draw sanctions and become a birther martyr.
It’s deja vu all over again. With enough of these silly birther lawyers we can erase the national debt.
Thank you.
Birfer sanctions are becoming the new stupid tax along with the state lotteries. I fully support the new tax.
But at least with the lottery there have been some spectacular successes, however improbable. Not so with ANY birther.
I think Mario is probably better suited for the fast food industry rather than a profession that requires clear mental faculties and an understanding of logic.
True, this just proves that birfer is stupid in a league alone.
In rereading some of the older comments on these blogs I was struck by the fact that all the birther legal machinations have provided the reality/legal community with a chance to perform extensive research on the questions posed which go beyond the simple standing answer which judges need to address. ALL of the birther points have been successfully addressed & sound arguments have been constructed. Can you say “law of unintended consequences”?
Please don’t suggest for Mario to serve food. I can’t imagine how irritated customers will be if Mario brings food to table 8 instead of table 6.
I was thinking that it should be a Birther Bigots only restaurant that specializes in serving crow.
If Mario is confined to work only in those “birthers only” exclusive restaurant, then let Mario serve caca to those customers.
Like he does now. That works!
Judge Surrick’s opinion in Berg v. Obama was certainly a great analysis for me.
Berg actually thought that a candidate or political party could be held to a campaign promise or platform? Hilarious! Did he just get off the boat?
Wow. Is Mario trying to prove that he is as batshit crazy as Orly? That paypal button must be pretty lucrative – I should get one…
Wow. Is Mario trying to prove that he is as bat#$!% crazy as Orly? That paypal button must be pretty lucrative – I should get one…
Guano can be used as fertilizer, which can be used in explosives. Maybe they are trying to make enough to make a b*mb.
What is Apuzzo talking about? He thinks that standing only require that he prove “particularized harm”? Article III standing also requires that he prove that the defendant is somehow responsible for that harm. Moreover, the third prong of standing requires that the court have the ability to grant the relief sought. If he is able to prove harm, he’s also got to meet the other two requirements, so just proving harm is not going to fill the bill. And as the courts have consistently said, they cannot provide the relief birthers are seeking; the third prong can never be met no matter what.
This is just more red meat for the birther minions who don’t know their a$$ from a hole in the ground when it comes to the law. The idea that if he can prove harm, he has standing is, in fact, being passed around on FAUX News forums as a result of this World Nutjob Daily article. And of course, when you try to explain the law regarding standing to them, they believe Apuzzo and WND anyway because that’s what they want to believe. This is just another opportunity for birthers to peddle propaganda and lies regarding this issue rather than something that will actually come to pass.
Apuzzo is after publicity. He energizes supporters by giving them hope.
In France, we call this kind of tactics “clutching at razor blades.”
Yup, another bite at the paypal scam! This is a great little paypal con game that went bad when the appeals court judges decided that the con was up and that Mario would be put out of business. Like Orly he took it one step too far and the judges turned the tables on him and are asking him to PROVE something – in this case that he is not a scamer. Wrong court Mario. LOL
To yguy, NC1 and other Denialists: I voted for Obama and actively supported him, knowing his father was a Kenyan citizen, as well as all the innuendo swirling around him. I actively supported him; he got 78% of the Jewish vote.
He got 80% of the popular vote here in Philly, as well as Pittsburgh. Philly is 43% black.
I intend to vote for him again. I also predict Cory Booker will follow. Chew on that.
Him and World Nutjob Daily, Doc.
I also find it comical that Apuzzo said that NOW he is going to look into standing. Well gee, shouldn’t he have done that BEFORE he filed the suit? Shouldn’t he have had all of his ducks in a row before going to court and accusing the president of the United States of not being eligible to hold office? What kind of attorney doesn’t know that they have to meet the three conditions of standing required in civil court?
Apuzzo, Taitz and Berg: the three stooges.
Only 3 days to go for Super Mario…..will he
A. Eat crow and apologize to the court saving himself sanction but incurring the unending wrath of Birferstan.
B. “Neglect” to enter a response in time hoping the judge will have forgotten
C. Yell “Freedom” and tell the judge….”No Apology to YOU” setting himself up for sanctions, contempt and possible loss of his licence but earning the (very temporary) love of Da Birfers and a possibly lucrative but again short term PayPal scalping scheme income stream.
Apuzzo is funny. I like the logic “Now we know we had no standing, but since the courts fined us, we now have standing.” He could use the same argument to get a new pen.
Whatever he writes he has to leave the impression with the birthers that they have been right all along & the courts are out to get them. There can be no acknowledgment that anything they have ever done has been wrong. They think they have built a spectacular edifice, but in reality it is a house of cards in an airless, gravity-free environment. A cosmic ray or mutual static repulsion will tear it asunder.
For those who miss Apuzzo:
On Apuzzo’s blog, a commenter posted a link to this article. It is just some rehashed birther nonsense.
What is interesting is that Apuzzo feels the need to comment there. And it isn’t his blog, so he can’t moderate the discussion.