Quantcast
Feeds: Email, RSS & Twitter

Get Our Videos By Email

 

8,300 Unique Visitors In The Past Day

 

Powered by Squarespace

 

Search The Archive Of 15,000 Videos

SEARCH THE DAILY BAIL

 

 

Hank Paulson Is A Criminal - Pass It On

"The Federal Reserve Is A Ponzi Scheme"


Get Our Videos By Email

THE FED UNDER FIRE: Must See Clip

Bernanke's Replacement: Happy Hour In Santa Cruz

Must See: National Debt Road Trip

"Of Course We're Not Going To  Payback the Chinese."

Dave Chappelle On White Collar Crime

Carlin: Wall Street Owns Washington

SLIDESHOW - Genius Signs From Irish IMF Protest

SLIDESHOW - Airport Security Cartoons - TSA

Most Recent Comments
Cartoons & Photos
SEARCH
« Green Energy Chronicles: SunEdison Enters Death Spiral | Main | This Is the Best Thing I've Seen All Year »
Thursday
Apr072016

DC Madam Lawyer Blair Sibley Is Probably Depressed Today So Go To His Blog And Say Something Nice

THIRTY DAYS IN THE HOLE

What's the worst that could happen if he just releases the list now?

Go say hello to Mr. Sibley at his blog. And write something nice. I do not wish to be the blogger who sent loads of negative vitriol in his direction.

 

UPDATE: Supreme Court Rejects DC Madam Case

---

Commentary from our own John Titus, lawyer, scholar and gentleman:

It appears the Supreme Court is saying you don't have standing--injury--until you are legally penalized for your actions; right now it's just an order, and courts cannot rule on orders (or statutes) unless there is a case between two parties, including an injured plaintiff.

Under art 3 of the constitution, courts can only decide "cases and controversies." Any number of criteria have been developed by the courts for what qualifies as a case: it has to be ripe, not moot, etc., and the plaintiff has to have standing/injury. Absent those criteria, the courts would be issuing advisory opinions, a judicial no-no.

In any case, Sibley should be happy. Roberts just cleared the dance floor for Sibley's next move. Imo, he's asking for a ruinously long delay by appealing to another justice. It's not as if his penalty would be any worse if he fired away now. And if he's ultimately right, as I think he is, there won't be any valid and enforceable penalty in any event.

 

In case you missed it earlier:

UPDATE: Supreme Court Rejects DC Madam Case

 

 

Background reading:

BAD NEWS FOR LYIN' TED: Supreme Court Adds DC Madam Case To Official Docket

 

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (10)

Further comment from Cheyenne/John Titus

---

To me, the case is far less interesting for its salacious details--though I would like to see a certain pathologically lying, sanctimonious scumbag presidential wannabe exposed as the fraud that he is, to be sure--than for the horrible precedent that's apparently been set.

Why not just release the names of the johns (and teds) in their entirety?

In the U.S., truth has been an absolute defense to libel since the John Peter Zenger trial in 1734. Pray tell what grounds other than defamation provide the basis for barring disclosure? The details of that case are just awesome. The judge, a loyalist, HATED Zenger and his lawyer, Andrew Hamilton. So Hamilton ignored the judge and pitched his client's case directly to the jury on the grounds just stated (truth = absolute defense), and the jury exonerated.

http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/bookmarks/zenger/

The Supreme Court has stepped into the shoes of the royalist judge for the umpteenth time and ignored that precedent, apparently.

I'm afraid this is all part and parcel of a much larger and very serious assault on U.S. sovereignty by global corporations. I touched on this in "Veneer of Justice," but it was the thin edge of the wedge, you may rest assured.

As for Sibley, let's hope he lives up to the spirit of American defiance shown by the jury in Philadelphia almost 300 years ago, and releases the names for all to see.

But if not, what's another peg down into the muck of despotism for this country? Frankly, I've lost count.
Apr 7, 2016 at 12:34 AM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
So we have a timetable at least...

"Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 22, I am now renewing that Application to Justice Thomas - a procedural second bite at the apple so to speak. I will wait upon his decision - which in the normal course should come by the middle of next week - before taking any further action regarding those Records."
Apr 7, 2016 at 12:38 AM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Why protect these asshats we unfortunately elect run this so-callen representative government. They want to play, let them pay. They wouldn't have a second thought nailing any of you to a cross. Let the names out! One problem is some of the Justices names are probably on the list.
Apr 7, 2016 at 6:39 AM | Unregistered CommenterInsidious
"One problem is some of the Justices names are probably on the list."

Yes, I think we all have the same thought. It wouldn't be beyond the realm of comprehension if we saw a SCOTUS name on the list.
Apr 7, 2016 at 11:10 AM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Herod: "Trust no one, my friend, no one. Not your most grateful freedman. Not your most intimate friend. Not your dearest child. Not the wife of your bosom. Trust no one."

Claudius: "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud . . . hatch out..."

Just seems like the right things to say. I'm sure that many will say that whoever possesses these secrets is, so long as they're secret and he keeps them, in danger.
Apr 7, 2016 at 2:57 PM | Unregistered CommenterRed Lebowski
You may or may not realize it BUT many people stand with you. If you do not post the list then send it to someone else who is willing to, I WOULD !
Apr 7, 2016 at 3:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterMilly Vanilly
Other people were given the list, in case something went wrong. One person/site (Rivero) has released the list in its raw form -- numbers only. They can be "reverse engineered" if someone wants to take the time. Go to whatreallyhappened dot com. Search in the CoverUp section (lower left of page)
Apr 7, 2016 at 10:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterGinger
@Ginger

We posted that list here as well, but Sibley commented yesterday that these lists are old data. He said he has looked at them online, and they are not the new stuff, but just copies of the already released data lists from the original case.

Either way he will be releasing the names himself next week, when he is denied by Justice Thomas.
Apr 7, 2016 at 10:49 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Hi,

I love your witting. Your post is very much helpful and informative. Keep up the good work and present us your best.

Regards
Clara
Apr 25, 2017 at 7:20 AM | Unregistered CommenterClara R. Scribner
Blogging is the new poetry. I find it wonderful and amazing in many ways.
May 25, 2017 at 4:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterBuy Contact Lenses

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.