UCC believe it or not

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

From the Colorado Supreme Court:



This was the most recent Supreme Court of Colorado opinion I could find that mentions who the Attorney General of that state is. It's not even a month old.

Some of you folks need to learn that David Merrill is not playing with a full deck. I am not saying this to be mean. It's simply a matter of fact, and you need to be aware of it before you follow any of his advice. He suffers from delusions that affect how he perceives things. Delusions of that type are usually termed schizophrenic or schizo-affective type ideations, if I remember correctly.

Remember...a federal judge in Colorado once tossed out a suit David filed the very next day after he filed it. This is very unusual. Usually a court waits for the defendant(s) to respond before taking any action, and they have 20 days to respond after being served in a federal case. David's complaint was such a hodgepodge of gibberish that the judge threw it out as soon as he saw it, with the comment that it was a "rambling, incoherent, nonsensical blotch on this court's docket." That's a judicial way of saying "The person who filed this is not mentally sound."

I do not know who David Merrill is and anyone who believes in the president of the US is considered delusional, now again I ask you can you crush this memorandum?

[Lawdog]

There's nothing to "crush." You posted a bunch of meaningless gibberish in a courthouse hallway. Big deal.

See if you can file it as a lawsuit against a named defendant, and get them served with papers, then see what happens.

If I post something in my local courthouse that says "I hereby declare myself to be Governor of the State of Georgia, and if anyone wishes to refute me they have 72 hours to do so", and no one bothers to respond to my posting, does that make me Governor?

Of course not.

What you posted has no more meaning in the eyes of the law than the stuff written on the stalls in the courthouse men's room. And it's even less amusing to read.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

There's nothing to "crush." You posted a bunch of meaningless gibberish in a courthouse hallway. Big deal.

See if you can file it as a lawsuit against a named defendant, and get them served with papers, then see what happens.

If I post something in my local courthouse that says "I hereby declare myself to be Governor of the State of Georgia, and if anyone wishes to refute me they have 72 hours to do so", and no one bothers to respond to my posting, does that make me Governor?

Of course not.

What you posted has no more meaning in the eyes of the law than the stuff written on the stalls in the courthouse men's room. And it's even less amusing to read.

I hate to use the fail twice in one night but you earned it, you appear to me to be a basic forum troll and have nothing to contribute to the UCC topic, not even an argument.
I said if you proved it wrong I would not post here again,
you fail and the decent thing to do would be to not post here again.

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

There's nothing to "crush." You posted a bunch of meaningless gibberish in a courthouse hallway. Big deal.

See if you can file it as a lawsuit against a named defendant, and get them served with papers, then see what happens.

If I post something in my local courthouse that says "I hereby declare myself to be Governor of the State of Georgia, and if anyone wishes to refute me they have 72 hours to do so", and no one bothers to respond to my posting, does that make me Governor?

Of course not.

What you posted has no more meaning in the eyes of the law than the stuff written on the stalls in the courthouse men's room. And it's even less amusing to read.

Translation: "I can't."

[palani]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

From the Colorado Supreme Court:
This was the most recent Supreme Court of Colorado opinion I could find that mentions who the Attorney General of that state is. It's not even a month old.

Wow. The Supreme Court of Colorada actually mentions his name!. And this makes his office official?

We now know exactly what that brown substance is on Lawdog's proboscis.

Take the example of the Emperor of North America by way of comparison. Here is a man who knows the value of both a seal and a buck!



Of the two men I would suspect Norton occupied the more lawful office. The other is a sham. Both might be considered mad but one actually embraced his office while the other attempts to hide from it.
http://www.zpub.com/sf/history/nort.html

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

What you posted has no more meaning in the eyes of the law than the stuff written on the stalls in the courthouse men's room. And it's even less amusing to read.

Lady Justice is blindfolded. So the fact that her eyes might see without the blindfold, seems to indicate that Lady Justice has been raped of her official covering, and 'Justice ' is no-longer blind, else she is still blindfolded and is being told by someone else what that someone else is seeing.

Anyway: you reference 'in the eyes of the law...", since when does a written document have eyes? And one other thing.... one more time; What is 'the law'?

Jerry Carlos

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by palani

Wow. The Supreme Court of Colorada actually mentions his name!. And this makes his office official?

OK Palani, suppose YOU tell us who is the "real" Attorney-General of Colorado...

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

OK Palani, suppose YOU tell us who is the "real" Attorney-General of Colorado...

Vacant office.

Imposter.

[palani]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

OK Palani, suppose YOU tell us who is the "real" Attorney-General of Colorado...

In truth, it might be occupied by anyone who might be willing to hold up a hand and swear an oath. Who really cares who actually occupies the office as long as he/she is willing to honor his/her oath.

In any event no evidence has been presented that this office is occupied by anyone. Do you want the job?

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by palani

IIn any event no evidence has been presented that this office is occupied by anyone.

Actually, you've been provided with plenty of evidence, but you and MRG have ignored it.