1. The “mystery Fax (header on the bottom of the 36 pages) began at 4:55PM and ended at 5:11PM for a total of 16 minutes. But where was the “mystery fax” machine located?
2. The fax from Judge Surricks office to Phillip Berg started at 18:09 or (6:09PM) and ended at 18:16 or (6:16PM) for a total of 7 minutes. Now what would cause a whole 9 minute discrepancy in the transmission times of a fax on the exact same number of pages? And even a slower machine would not cause a difference of more than double the time of transmission for the same number of pages.
3. The ORDER has no file/date stamp on the document at any page whatsoever which is required and is standard Court procedure. Why?
Judge R. Barclay Surrick, whether intentional or not, has created a situation that challenges the very integrity of the US District Court for the Eastern District of PA as well as the integrity of the Judge himself.
All of these issues must be address without delay, and the owner and location of the “mystery Fax” must be disclosed immediately with explanation as to why a ruling said to be issued by Judge Surrick, was in reality Faxed to Judge Surrick? The first and only Fax header that should be on the ruling when faxed to Attorney Philip J Berg should have been none other than that of Judge Surrick alone.
Very, very sloppy!!!
ping
And we thought the Toons were dirty.
SURRICK looks like a PARROT, certainly NOT A JUDGE!
Looks like some very dirty judging here and what would we expect from a Clintoon appointee?
Come on, now. This is ridiculous. Sidley Austin is a HUGE law firm. It has nearly 2000 attorneys at any one time — not to mention contract attorneys, secretaries, law clerks and ancillary staff.
So ... a former law clerk of Surrick worked at one of the largest firms in the US, as did the Obama’s, and that’s supposed to be a conflict of interest?
It would be odd for a Chicago attorney to NOT have put in some time at Sidley. Most attorneys that are worth anything have put in some time at one of the big firms — personally, I’ve worked as a contractor with Sidley Austin, Baker Botts, Fulbright & Jaworski, and Bracewell Giuliani.
This is a tepid connection at best ... it is not as if they were at the same 10-attorney firm and thus must’ve known each other.
H
It is against the law to send a FAX without an identification and telephone number showing where it came from.
Surrick isn’t a judge, he’s a janitor.
Dan Rather did it from a remote Kinko’s somewhere. Phony but accurate.
Thanks pissant. Appears to be a conflict of interest.
Ping.
"Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments.
Bring the revolution home.
Kill your parents, that's where it's really at."
- - - Bill Ayers, Weather Underground, 1970.
But God I am sick of all this maneuvering to avoid the release of a man's birth certificate
We'd have had Joe the Plumbers birth certificate in a NY second
Which one of the delegates will make the challenge - will THEY have standing in the court system, or does the EC itself make the ruling and be done with it? What if Barry is challenged and it goes no where? Is there POTUS recourse? Any examples in our history on this?
Will we see a law - regardless of this election outcome - to prequalify candidates?
The Act and the rules of the Federal Trade Commission require that any message sent to a fax machine must clearly mark on the first page or on each page of the message:
bullet the date and time the transmission is sent;
bullet the identity of the sender; and bullet the telephone number of the sender or of the sending fax machine.
All fax machines manufactured on or after December 20, 1992 and all facsimile modem boards manufactured on or after December 13, 1995 must have the capability to clearly mark such identifying information on the first page or on each page of the transmission.
Is Berg taking this to the Supreme Court now?
Larry Sinclair is where the GOP should put their spotlight. We only have one week. They should give him cash to follow obambi around.
Obambi is a closet homo, and America needs to know.
ping