[Mr. Lucky]

It’s not gaining the slightest bit of traction. The fact that this guy is apparently unable to craft a cogent sentence doesn’t help his case a whole lot.

[AmericanVictory]

You'd like people to believe that the simple issus here cannot be understood, right? Any evidence of the reality of that or is this the fallback from ridicule as the only weapon? For example, why is the part about the de facto officer doctrine hard to understand? You don't want people to grasp such a simple concept, I take it, lest they think there might be a remedy for your Messiah's fraud.

[EDINVA]

What, pray tell, are you posting about? On what experience with federal appellate courts and their procedures are you basing your comment? Since you are so knowledgeable about crafting federal appeals briefs, why don’t you refer us to some you have written? We can send them to the author of this brief so he can improve his craft to your satisfaction.

Or, have you never read an appellate brief before? This isn’t Strunk and White or English Comp 101.

[American Constitutionalist]

What do you mean not being able to craft a cogent sentence ? Their English is better than some I have read, and I can fully understand it... or are you trying to project a view on their report that is not really there, as in, there is no THERE, THERE.

Kind of like the main fringe media criticizing it because he forgot to put a period at the very last sentence at the end of the paragraph.