Reply from Dep of Justice. they admit that the mail clerk got the pleadings and signed for them, but they are saying that the pleadings disappeared inside the building and they are asking the judge for 30 days since the government shutdown ended to respond
Posted on | October 24, 2013 | 12 Comments
-
Activity in Case 1:13-cv-01
020-RCL TAITZ v. DONAHUE et al Response to Document Inboxx DCD_ECFNotice@dcd.uscourts.gov1:55 PM (25 minutes ago)to DCD_ECFNoticeThis is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system. Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended.
***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.U.S. District Court
District of Columbia
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered by Van Horn, Daniel on 10/24/2013 at 4:55 PM and filed on 10/24/2013Case Name: TAITZ v. DONAHUE et al Case Number: 1:13-cv-01020-RCL Filer: PATRICK DONAHUE DAVID C. WILLIAMS Document Number: 8 Docket Text:
RESPONSE re [7] Response to Document filed by PATRICK DONAHUE, DAVID C. WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # (1) Declaration Second Declaration of Daniel F. Van Horn)(Van Horn, Daniel)
1:13-cv-01020-RCL Notice has been electronically mailed to:Daniel Franklin Van Horn     daniel.vanhorn@usdoj.gov
ORLY TAITZ     orly.taitz@gmail.com
1:13-cv-01020-RCL Notice will be delivered by other means to::
The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:
Comments
12 Responses to “Reply from Dep of Justice. they admit that the mail clerk got the pleadings and signed for them, but they are saying that the pleadings disappeared inside the building and they are asking the judge for 30 days since the government shutdown ended to respond”
Leave a Reply
October 24th, 2013 @ 1:28 pm
You know; if this had been a private attorney doing this nonsense, they’d likely be brought up on charges for misrepresentation and probably disbarred….. Dang.
October 24th, 2013 @ 1:41 pm
Come on, Holder, do your job! Everyone knows that you have been playing around with anything that Dr Orly needs to have done!
Do you ever GROW UP?
October 24th, 2013 @ 3:13 pm
Of course they will be given the extension. What other option does the judge have?
Can you resubmit the pleadings in an effort to condense their obfuscation?
If you don’t resubmit, they can continue to declare the documents missing and ask for repeated extensions — to find them.
October 24th, 2013 @ 3:17 pm
no need, they have them from PACER
October 24th, 2013 @ 5:20 pm
Right now, I’m screaming silently because no one can hear me if I were to ruin my vocal chords.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Why does Holdie need to review an Ssn that belongs to a dead man???
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
October 24th, 2013 @ 6:06 pm
“They admit that the mail clerk got the pleadings and signed for them, but they are saying that the pleadings disappeared inside the building and they are asking the judge for 30 days since the government shut-down ended to respond.”
So, we are to believe that such politically-sensitive, “hot potato” pleadings simply, inexplicably and spontaneously “disappeared” inside the building all by themselves after Justice Department clerk Eddy Hase logged them in? What an amazing and convenient series of coincidences! Holder’s Justice Department must think that judge Lamberth is either biased and complicit or incredibly naïve. How do they know that the pleadings “disappeared” somewhere inside the building, and not into Holder’s attaché case or automobile glove compartment?
If judge Lamberth is a man of integrity who really seeks truth and justice, he will tell them “I simply do not believe your sophomoric stories any more” and, instead of granting their requests, order Justice Department clerk Eddy Hase to name under oath the person to whom he gave those sensitive pleadings after he logged them in.
After all, does it really take 30 days to create a new “original” SS-5 registration form or to discover that strangely, alas, the original form has, like other sensitive documents, suddenly and inexplicably “gone missing”?
October 25th, 2013 @ 2:14 am
The mere fact that they lost the pleadings, argues that they should respond to the FOIA request with full disclosure before the original documents are disposed of….
October 25th, 2013 @ 5:17 am
Mrs. Taitz, I do believe the Date “Eddie” signed for those Documents, THE GOVERNMENT WAS OPEN!!! And running as Disfunctual as USUAL!!
Mention THAT to Judge Lamberth!
October 25th, 2013 @ 7:22 am
A couple decades ago when I ran a home-based freelance Desktop Publishing business I very easily could have created a phony short form and/or long form birth certificate from any State as well as a Selective Service Registration Card which would have been indistinguishable from their authentic counterparts — using an Atari MEGA ST-4 computer, “Calamus” Desktop Publishing software, an Epson “Expression” scanner, an Atari SLM804 Laserprinter and commercially available embossing seals and postal stamps.
October 25th, 2013 @ 7:26 am
I did and I am waiting for an answer
October 25th, 2013 @ 11:12 am
Dr. Taitz
Here is a video that might be helpful for you. it is from the Walid Shoebat newsletter in regards to Obama’s radical ties:
https://shoebat.com/shoebat-foundation/obamas-wahhabist-fundraising-empire/
October 25th, 2013 @ 1:14 pm
Karl, Comrade Holder doesn’t think anything. He knows Comrade Lamberth is both bias and complicit. It’s just a big cat & mouse game to them.