Welcome
Welcome to SuiJurisForum.com --- You are currently viewing our boards as a guest. Members of this FREE Community are able to gain access to write capabilities, private messaging, a chat room, extra forums, and more!

***If you decide to Join our FREE Community... then DON'T FORGET to PASS/SKIP the multiple ADVERTISEMENTS during Registration that ask for Phone Numbers!! ***

The Last Executive Order?

Discuss the credit card, collection agency, and credit reporting act, etc.

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Tue Feb 21, 2017 11:11 pm

I have been broadcasting to the brain trust tonight and wanted to show what a shambles the Federal Register is in about TRUMP's Executive Orders. When I got there I actually found the Federal Register in a shambles:

Federal Register in a shambles 2 21 17.jpg



And then I checked back in wonderment, to find that the Federal Register is hacked:

Federal Register in a shambles hacked.jpg


So you might remember my hypothesis that if it does not appear in the Indexed Federal Register, then the Executive Orders are null and void and without the force of law.
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

 

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:16 pm

The link appears to be repaired.

https://www.federalregister.gov/executi ... trump/2017

Somebody showed me another way around the index:

https://www.federalregister.gov/executive-order/13772


Executive Order 13772 Missing.jpg
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:01 pm

Day after day... same stalled out Index!


The link appears to be repaired.

https://www.federalregister.gov/executi ... trump/2017

Somebody showed me another way around the index:

https://www.federalregister.gov/executive-order/13772


Image
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby Tuaca1107 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:00 pm

It appears that EO 13769 which was the first one, has been vacated by a panel of 5 9th circuit court judges. They really blasted the 3 who blocked the EO. The original EO block was vacated.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/five-9t ... -decision/


The here is the info on both EO's "travel ban"

"Executive Order 13780, titled Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, is an executive order signed by United States President Donald Trump on March 6, 2017, that places limits on travel to the U.S. from certain countries, and by all refugees who do not possess either a visa or valid travel documents. According to its terms on March 16, 2017, this executive order revoked and replaced Executive Order 13769 issued January 27, 2017."
Tuaca1107
Voluntary Servitude
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Have thanks: 1 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:12 am

Changing "So help me God." to "SO HELP ME GOD." is called capitonym. At first blush it is simply a noun in specific. Specific to what? That becomes special use of the term.

I have been thinking about what George WASHINGTON did, according to Shoonra. George added the words, "So help me God." at the end of his oath of office impromptu. In that case, strictly speaking, the sentence would be moot. But Congress picked up on it forming the oath for federal judges in the 1789 Judiciary Act and that carries over to the citations on the oaths today.

So it began as a private use within the Lodge:

Image


And continues in the esoteric:

WOLSKI testifies about oaths Doc 9 s.jpg


But not unnoticed:

Oath WOLSKI R4C.jpg



It may be me but it feels like Shoonra and Wserra discussed it, and decided to remove Shoonra's comment about WASHINGTON adding this to his oath.
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Wed Mar 22, 2017 7:53 am

Tuaca1107 wrote:It appears that EO 13769 which was the first one, has been vacated by a panel of 5 9th circuit court judges. They really blasted the 3 who blocked the EO. The original EO block was vacated.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/five-9t ... -decision/


The here is the info on both EO's "travel ban"

"Executive Order 13780, titled Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, is an executive order signed by United States President Donald Trump on March 6, 2017, that places limits on travel to the U.S. from certain countries, and by all refugees who do not possess either a visa or valid travel documents. According to its terms on March 16, 2017, this executive order revoked and replaced Executive Order 13769 issued January 27, 2017."


The amended ORDER 3/17 shows the vote.

Doc 3 Motion for Restraining Order.pdf
(480.86 KiB) Downloaded 1 time




Doc 191 amended ORDER 3 17 17.pdf
(759.26 KiB) Downloaded 1 time


03/17/2017 191

Filed Order for PUBLICATION Amending Order Filed 3/15/17 (WILLIAM C. CANBY, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and MICHELLE T. FRIEDLAND) (Concurrence by Judge Reinhardt, Concurrence by Judge Berzon, Dissent by Judge Kozinski, Dissent by Judge Bybee and Dissent by Judge Bea - (SEE ATTACHED FOR FULL TEXT)) This court in a published order previously denied a motion of the government for a stay of a restraining order pending appeal. 847 F.3d 1151 (9th Cir. 2017). That order became moot when this court granted the government’s unopposed motion to dismiss its underlying appeal. Order, Mar. 8, 2017. No party has moved to vacate the published order. A judge of this court called for a vote to determine whether the court should grant en banc reconsideration in order to vacate the published order denying the stay. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the active judges in favor of en banc reconsideration. Vacatur of the stay order is denied. See U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18 (1994) (holding that the “extraordinary remedy of vacatur” is ordinarily unjustified when post-decision mootness is caused by voluntary action of the losing party). This order is being filed along with a concurrence from Judge Reinhardt, a concurrence from Judge Berzon, a dissent from Judge Kozinski, a dissent from Judge Bybee, and a dissent from Judge Bea. No further opinions will be filed. [10362285] (RMM) [Entered: 03/17/2017 05:57 PM]



It appears that EO 13769 which was the first one, has been vacated by a panel of 5 9th circuit court judges. They really blasted the 3 who blocked the EO. The original EO block was vacated.


I am not sure how to read it either. 3 to 2 generally means that the 3 won the vote. The order has been "dissented" and therefore the EO is back in effect?

That is how I am reading it so far.
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:14 am

In my opinion it is ruled DISSENT. Four of the Five (Star Chamber) are unbound by oath:


Oath REINHARDT concurrence.gif



Oath BERZON concurrence.gif



Oath KOZINSKI dissented.gif
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Re: The Last Executive Order?

Postby David Merrill » Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:19 am

The only vote that counts is the one that does not indict:


Oath BEA dissented.gif



This is a Dissent Vote:


Oath NONE BYBEE dissented.pdf
(840.12 KiB) Downloaded 4 times



BYBEE dissents and none of the others has a vote because they are not bonded and the offices they represent are vacant. They altered their oaths.

This makes me wonder if TRUMP is a Mason? If so how can he be President at the same time? If he is under influence of the Lodge in this manner then let's say there is a private bonding; that is what this "SO HELP ME GOD." is all about. Then the vote is two to two with BYBEE being disqualified for not giving the correct handshake before weighing in...
David Merrill
Freeman
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:15 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Have thanks: 21 time

Previous

Return to Banks, Collection, & CRA

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

suspicion-preferred