Posted on 10/08/2001 8:28:01 PM PDT by Luis Gonzalez
For Immediate Release
10/8/2001
Washington, D.C. Monday, October 8, 2001
Judicial Watch General Counsel, Mr. Larry Klayman, took a respite from his unceasing efforts to obliterate Osama bin Laden and the forces of world terrorism to announce the filing of Judicial Watch’s record-setting 2,000th frivolous lawsuit.
“Judicial Watch is the undisputed leader in the burgeoning field of frivolous litigation and we wanted to do something special for our 2,000th groundless action,” said Klayman. On behalf of the Babe Ruth and Roger Maris Estates, Litigious Larry is suing Major League Baseball for allowing San Francisco slugger Barry Bonds, St. Louis Cardinal first baseman Mark McGwire and Chicago Cubs outfielder Sammy Sosa to diminish the single season home run record.
The Judicial Watch suit alleges collusion among the various ball clubs to dilute the accomplishments of Ruth and Maris. “Ruth’s 60 home runs stood unequalled until 1961 when the addition of eight games to the schedule helped Roger Maris hit 61 home runs. Ruth’s record stood for 34 years and Maris’ mark stood for another 37 years before McGwire and Chicago Cubs outfielder Sammy Sosa shattered the record with 70 and 65 home runs respectively in 1998. Now, just three years later, Bonds comes along to top McGwire’s mark. This home run explosion is the result of uncontrolled expansion, smaller ball parks and a juiced-up baseball,” fumed Klayman.
“Barry Bond’s recent home run orgy underscores our commitment to restore integrity to America’s national pastime,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “With this unprecedented lawsuit, we hope to share in the limelight and teach all these overpaid athletes that no one is above the risk of a frivolous lawsuit.”
“The suit against Barry Bonds is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Klayman. Apparently, Judicial Watch is also going after U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist as well as the estates of several deceased justices who participated in the decision in the early 70s to grant major league baseball an exemption from the antitrust laws.
“We are determined to maximize publicity and media exposure from our first suit against Major League baseball,” said Fitton. “Our contributions from disgruntled conservatives have pretty much dried up since Al Gore’s defeat. We hoped that bringing frivolous lawsuits against John Ashcroft and the Bush administration would attract disgruntled liberals to help offset projected revenue losses. But we badly underestimated how stingy liberals are when it comes to parting with their money. Now we’re trying to identify new income sources to redress our serious cash flow problems. Disgruntled sports fans is an obvious and, for us, untapped revenue source,” Fitton said.
Klayman and Fitton scoff at conservative critics’ claims that, notwithstanding all the lawsuits and publicity-seeking stunts, Judicial Watch has yet to win an actual case. “Nonsense,” says Larry, “Judicial Watch has won a number of important victories. For instance, I recently peeled off a Pull ‘n Play sticker from a Burger King sandwich and won a BK Double Whopper Jr. That wasn’t just a fluke either: Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton won a large order of french fries the same day,” Klayman boasted.
Judicial Watch isn’t resting on its laurels following its triumphant victory against Burger King, Fitton declared. A few days later, Judicial Watch earned an unprecedented appellate victory against Macy’s Department Store, which initially refused to let Klayman return a men’s cotton dress shirt without a receipt. However, Klayman took the matter up with a store supervisor who agreed to give Larry a store credit for the shirt. “This was a fantastic victory for Judicial Watch,” said Fitton.
In another stunning victory, Judicial Watch recently received a personal letter from Ed McMahon, informing them that they may have already won $78 million in the Publisher’s Clearinghouse sweepstakes. “Some contestants overlook the extra prize sticker which gives several extra chances to win, but our diligent and capable staff successfully completed those tricky forms to maximize our chances,” said President Tom Fitton.
Meanwhile, Judicial Watch’s war against terrorism continues to strike back at America’s foes. “It’s no coincidence that President Bush ordered military strikes against Kabul, Kandahar and Jalalabad just a few days after Judical Watch’s threatened actions against the terrorists responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks,” said Klayman. “Clearly the United States government supports Judicial Watch’s war against bin Laden,” said Larry.
Bonds, who hit his 73rd home run last night, could not be reached for comment.
Media contact: 1 (800) GO-LARRY
For further inquiries:
Larry Klayman (US): 1 (800) SUES-MOM
For more information please refer to
http://www.judicialwatch.org/
I would worry about myself, though, if I could get the trademark JW faux-portentiousness down so perfectly.
And for the record, I thought long since that Klayman's approach to the Clintons was basically unserious - too many lawsuits, too little focus, obviously designed to generate press releases not results. And yes, the fact that he turned on a dime and was after the Bush Administration before they got moved in did put the icing on the cake for me.
If you don't think the "bleeding borders" constitute a threat to our nation, and if you don't think that our lax immigration laws weren't at least partially responsible for us losing track of the beasts who attacked us...that's your blindness.
And for what it's worth, I haven't expressed any fondness for our NORTHERN border being like a sieve, either. But really cute attempt at trying to paint me as some kind of bigot. Hehehe. Too bad it didn't work. You might have gotten some thumbs-up from La Raza.
In any case...getting back to the SUBJECT (ahem)...did you write this piece simply to express your opinion of JW and Larry Klayman...or have you also just been itching to attempt to blast anyone who came in here who might parody your view, or who might not think it was that funny?
Don't be so all-fire sensitive, Will. For what it's worth, it's a pretty good parody!
I mean, I chuckled.
But if you're lookin' to yank chains, my friend, you shouldn't be hollering if someone tugs at yours a tad!
"All's fair in luvs 'n' laffs!"
Now give us a SMOOCH!
And yes...I KNOW that Larry isn't the enemy. **g**
Couldn't swear by me, or your previous responses on this thread.....l
What a pompous ass you are, I count at least three attorneys on this thread. I understand quite well, thank you very much, as a matter of fact I understand it this well.
GO PAT GO!!!!HAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
Well with that said all that's left to say is, GO PAT GO!
BWAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Uh...the guy whose name appears on top, right after the word Author...
I held out hope for LK until the end....the Peter Paul pardon for Clinton bribe lawsuit. Here's a man evading tax charges in Brazil, angry because he tried to buy off the Clintons with a Spago dinner, etc., and wasn't given a pardon. The case made Larry and PP look foolish, and gave the Clintons a chance to preen and discount Judicial Watch's previous efforts.
I didn't know about JW's involvement in this case. What did they do?
No, actually I wouldn’t. I haven’t ever seen one like it. Certainly not from an organization I support. Am I wrong? Can you point me to another news release that complains that no one is listening to its news releases?URGENT MESSAGE FROM LARRY KLAYMAN, FOX NEWS CHANNEL IS BLOCKING JUDICIAL WATCHPretty standard cry for attention, you expect to see it from any organization, really.
You know, I essentially agreed with Bush's decision, but I've got NO problem with Judicial Watch investigating this stuff.I disagreed with Bush, strongly. At the same time it was a political decision. I am sick and tired of every whining ninny going to the courts to try to force their way on everyone else. I strongly disagree with our politicians getting sued every time they make a decision. If it wasn’t illegal, leave them alone. Political decisions should be resolved at the ballot box, not in the courts where the liberals rule, and always will.
It did, till it became clear it was more hot air. And it is blaming the administration."During the last eight years of scandal during the Clinton administration, and the first eight months of the Bush Administration, reports this morning confirm that little to nothing was done to secure our nation?s airports and transportation systems as a whole - despite warnings."Nothing done - despite warnings. Isn't that bad? Doesn't that make ya the least bit curious? Is your main problem with LK's complaint that it includes eight months of an administration you like?
Uh, ok I admit this part is a little vague and platitudinous. (What exactly are they going to "investigate"? :) Still, kind of hard to argue against isn't it?How to get back on Fox news, of course. ;-)
You really, honestly don't want this stuff investigated by other people, and it would bother you if it were? I still just don't get it...Then you are being obtuse. What is there to investigate? Bush said, well this will get me more votes so I’ll do this on stem cells. Two administrations said, well, the political will isn’t there to lock down our airports and strip search everyone. That’s what the people want, so we will leave it that way. AT worst, these things are crass political decisions, and to investigate each and every thing a president does, regardless of wrong doing or illegality, is insane. That is no way to govern. That is my problem, Klayman goes off on these things for no good reason with no hope of any success other than getting in the news. That is what he is good at. Just not my style.
patent +AMDG
I would worry about myself, though, if I could get the trademark JW faux-portentiousness down so perfectly.
Hey! I resemble that remark. :-)
I didn't mention anyone in particular, Merc. If the Ku Klux Klan robes don't fit... Just kidding!
But if you're lookin' to yank chains, my friend, you shouldn't be hollering if someone tugs at yours a tad!
I didn't mind at all, just thought I'd return the favor, so to speak. :-)
Now give us a SMOOCH!
Now you're talkin'! This is the moment I've been waiting for! PUCKER UP, BABY! I'm ready for ya!
The former first lady denied the charge.
Paul claims he is a victim of political persecution in the United States.
"He is going to fight to avoid extradition and for his right to remain in Brazil," Paul's lawyer Tom Fitton told the newspaper Folha de Sao Paulo. He said his client was subject to persecution because he had "important information on crimes committed by Bill and Hillary Clinton."
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.