Posted on 10/23/2012 7:23:21 PM PDT by chessplayer
Desperation is in the air, and The Chicago Machine's ugliness is just starting to get ginned up. They've already all but accused Romney of being a "felon" and of murdering Joe Soptic's wife, but now that the polls are moving against Obama – and the President's closing argument has been reduced to Big Bird, binders, and bayonets – President Obama's about launch his own personal freak show starring Jeremiah Wright, Gloria Allred, and Andrew Sullivan.
Today, things got improbably worse when the Daily Beast's Andrew Sullivan, who has reportedly been a guest of Obama's at the White House, launched into a punishingly long, bigoted, desperate anti-Mormon tirade against Romney that burns a warehouse full of strawmen and employs enough guilt-by-association to choke the ghost of Joe McCarthy:
Obama's infamous Trifecta of Freak-dom ended today with none other than -- you knew this was coming -- Gloria Allred:
"The Boston Globe is headed to court tomorrow morning for an emergency hearing in an attempt to obtain a court order to unseal the sworn testimony given by Mitt Romney in a prior court case and to lift a gag order so that the parties can speak about Romney. Gloria Allred will be in court representing one of the parties in the case," a source close to the situation tells RadarOnline.com.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I remember the Jack Ryan thing. Obama wanted that job as a congressman in Illinois, so they dug up some dirt on Ryan. It scared all the other Republicans in Illinois and they all retired, en masse.
bfl
Wasn’t it conventional wisdom that the brutality of the Republican primaries completely vetted Romney? Perhaps I was naïve to believe it.
is she even licensed in Mass?
if not, who is the attorney vouching for her and putting their license on the chopping block?
Gloria Allred
SHE IS NOT ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN MASS.
http://massbbo.org/bbolookup.php
ok, btw no written retainer unless for a contingency fee.
ALSO:
http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/source/mass/rules/sjc/sjc315.html
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Rule 3:15: Pro Hac Vice Registration Fee
[Disclaimer]
1. Each attorney not admitted to practice in this Commonwealth who seeks to be admitted pro hac vice in the Superior Court, Land Court, or any appellate court (not including the Appellate Division of the District Court or of the Boston Municipal Court) shall pay a non-refundable pro hac vice registration fee of $301 per case to the Board of Bar Overseers (Board), except when the attorney is providing pro bono publico legal assistance to an indigent client. Each attorney not admitted to practice in this Commonwealth who seeks to be admitted pro hac vice in any other court shall pay a non-refundable pro hac vice registration fee of $101 per case to the Board, except when the attorney is providing pro bono publico legal assistance to an indigent client. For purposes of this Rule, a case shall include an appeal. However, where an attorney has paid the appropriate registration fee of $301 or $101 and the case is removed, transferred, appealed or further appellate review is sought, no additional fee need be paid. Only individual attorneys, not law firms, may seek such admission.
A. Payment may be made by check, money order or online pursuant to policies established by the Board.
B. Payment will be accompanied by a form prescribed by the Board including at least the following information:
(1) The name, business address, telephone number, email address and attorney license number and states in which the attorney is licensed;
(2) The court in which the motion for pro hac vice admission is to be made, the name of the party to be represented, and the docket number if it is known; and
(3) a statement, made under the penalties of perjury, that the attorney is admitted to practice and in good standing in every jurisdiction where the attorney is admitted, and an acknowledgment that the attorney is subject to discipline by the Supreme Judicial Court and the Board.
C. Within seven days of receipt of a pro hac vice registration fee the Board will send an acknowledgment to the attorney seeking admission.
D. An attorney who is exempt from paying a registration fee because the attorney will provide pro bono publico legal assistance to an indigent client must complete and submit to the Board the form required by paragraph B, along with a statement that the attorney will be providing services pro bono publico to an indigent client.
2. Motions to a court for admission pro hac vice shall be made by a member of the bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and must aver that the registration fee required by Rule 3:15 has been paid or include, as an attachment, a copy of the Board acknowledgment. An attorney who is exempt from paying a registration fee because the attorney will provide pro bono publico legal assistance to an indigent client must aver that the attorney will provide such assistance.
3. The Board may retain a portion of each pro hac vice registration fee to cover its costs in administering the fee and will pay the balance to the IOLTA Committee on a quarterly basis. The IOLTA Committee shall disburse the fees in the same manner as other IOLTA funds are disbursed in accordance with Rule 1.15(g)(4) and (5) of Rule 3:07, Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct.
Added April 12, 2012, effective September 4, 2012.
Well, problem with Obama is the same as he has had through the debates, Romney just won’t stop despite some of the bizarre issues the MSM and Obama have tried so far. I honestly can’t wait for Allred to give her accusation so I can laugh myself to bed.
Just now breaking from TMZ...
Mitt Romney was heavily involved in the extremely messy divorce of one of his key supporters ... and the Boston Globe is going to court first thing Wednesday morning in an attempt to unseal the court file as well as lift a gag order ... TMZ has learned.The divorce was between Staples co-founder Tom Stemberg and his first wife Maureen. We’re told the divorce battle lasted for years and was extremely ugly.Sources tell us Romney gave both a deposition in the divorce and testified in the trial. According to our sources, the Boston Globe got a tip that there was “juicy information about Romney” in the sealed documents.Romney, Stemberg and Maureen were all served papers by the Globe notifying them that the paper was trying to unseal the case and lift the gag order enforced on all parties.According to an article in the Boston Globe in 2005, Maureen received nearly 500,000 shares of Staples stock in the divorce ... but sold have her shares before the company went public.Our sources say Tom has filed papers opposing the Globe’s motion. Romney’s lawyers have not responded.Tom has been a major Romney supporter, even speaking for five minutes at the Republican National Convention.We’re told Gloria Allred represents someone connected with the divorce and we believe — though we have not confirmed it — that is Maureen. If the gag order is lifted, Maureen and others could freely talk about the divorce ... less than two weeks before the election.
TMZ now reporting it has to do with Romney’s testimony at the divorce hearing of a close associate.
I think Romney’s comment from the last debate is going to pop into people’s minds here. And I’m wondering if he didn’t plant it there for this very reason.
“Criticizing me, is not a policy Mr. President.”
Nope, potty dumps by Allred are not policies to get the nation back on track.
Doesn't matter. All the democrats and LSM have to do is infer, spin and lie. They will try to smear Romney with his testimony as a Mormon Bishop.
Sounds like a desperate reach. I feel better.
This has the vague smell of old news. Don’t we already know something about Mitt’s involvement in the case?
Cook County thug politics at its finest. “Unsealing” sealed court records worked for the sleazy bastard once before in Illinois (viz, Jack Ryan), now he’s going to try it at the national level. I hope he spends the rest of his miserable life in prison or exile. This is SO beneath the dignity of the Presidency. This alone should disqualify him from serving.
Presidents can appoint judges so can they remove them?
The Boston Globe is working to unseal possibly damaging records while the LA Times continues to seal their own records of Obama’s relationship to Rashid Khalidi. Wasn’t long ago the press was a bulwark against tyranny.
@by gswilder and the snippet from TMZ above:
This is about the divorce proceedings of a biz associate years back? Wow.
Just, wow.
Incredibly weak sauce. Transparent in fact.
Desperation. Desperation. Embarrasingly so.
It may have been out there before. I didn’t remember it before you said something. I don’t believe I do now either.
_________________________________________________________
Getting court records unsealed is Obamas MO.
Getting juicy info on a temple recommend holding ex bishop is rather unlikely.
The two men were business partners, likely he had to testify about income received by his partner. I seriously doubt that there would be anything damming in it about Romney.
If Romney was THEIR bishop he could have know juicy details about his partner but that would still be privileged information that a judge would be unlikely to unseal. A man has a right to expect privacy to information told to his pastor and his lawyer.
If you’re going to pull something like this off, it better have real zing, because if it doesn’t it’s going to cost you big-time.
2. Gloria needs to have something good. I mean, better than Mitt being a witness in a divorce case.
3. Nobody throws Willie Brown under the bus. Nobody. That old guy has forgotten more about political infighting than Barry will ever, ever know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.