Tweet
Sibley v Obama: Motion To Disqualify Judge John Bates For Being An Accessory After The Fact
Birther Report
12/30/2012
Excerpt:
Sibley Motion To Disqualify Judge John Bates For Being An Accessory After The Fact And To Have The Dismissal Order Vacated
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY V. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
CASE NO.:12-CV-0183 2 (JDB)
PETITIONER’S MOTION TO VACATE DECEMBER 19, 2012, ORDER OF
DISMISSAL AND TO DISQUALIFY THE HONORABLE JOHN D BATES
[ excerpts ]
Petitioner, Montgomery Blair Sibley (“Sibley”), invoking 28 U.S.C. §1746, states that the matters stated herein are true under penalty of perjury, moves to vacate the Court’s December 19, 2012, order of dismissal and, pursuant to the fundamental right to an impartial tribunal, due process, 28 U.S.C. §455(b)(5)(i)1 and/or 28 U.S.C. §1442, moves for entry of an order disqualifying the Honorable John D Bates from further involvement in this matter, and for grounds in support thereof states: [...]
I. THE LAW OF DISQUALIFICATION/RECUSAL
Disqualification of judges of this Court is first commanded by a litigant’s fundamental right to an impartial tribunal which pre-dates – and is preserved by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to – the Constitution. [...]
II. THE FACTS AND REASONS MANDATING DISQUALIFICATION/RECUSAL
As for the §144 bias or prejudice, I believes that Honorable John D Bates has a personal bias or prejudice either against me and/or in favor of the Respondent. The reasons for the belief that such bias or prejudice exists is found in his Memorandum Order of December 19, 2012. In particular, in that opinion, the Honorable John D Bates:
a. Mis-applies the pejorative term “birther” to me demonstrating his complete lack of understanding of the issues I raise and his utilization of ad hominem reasoning in adjudicating my claim. Indeed, he continues by mis-characterizing my argument as based upon the claim that Obama was “supposedly was not born in the United States.” In fact, I make no such claim but instead raise the incontestable issue that Obama’s father was not a U.S. Citizen and the documents that support Obama’s claim to be born in Hawaii appear to be forgeries.
b. Refuses to allow oral argument to enlighten him on points of fact and law that he clearly misunderstood.
c. Patently violated LCvR 65.1(d). On November 14, 2012, I filed my “Verified Motions for Preliminary Hearing and Expedited Discovery and Demand for Hearing”. In that motion, I specifically requested a hearing pursuant to LCvR 65.1(d)3 which obligates Judge Bates to rule upon the Motion for Preliminary injunction within twenty-one (21) days. Yet, thirty-five (35) days later, Judge Bates had failed to discharge his obligation imposed by LCvR 65.1(d). [...]
Here, the Honorable John D Bates is knowingly assisting Defendant Obama by refusing me access to the Grand Jury to present evidence of his criminal behavior in order to hinder or prevent Defendant Obama’s trial or punishment. As such, the Honorable John D Bates is arguably an “accessory after the fact” and thus his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” in making rulings in this matter. [...]
FULL MOTION CONTINUED BELOW OR HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118443643
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogs...dge-bates.html
Birther Report
12/30/2012
Excerpt:
Sibley Motion To Disqualify Judge John Bates For Being An Accessory After The Fact And To Have The Dismissal Order Vacated
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY V. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
CASE NO.:12-CV-0183 2 (JDB)
PETITIONER’S MOTION TO VACATE DECEMBER 19, 2012, ORDER OF
DISMISSAL AND TO DISQUALIFY THE HONORABLE JOHN D BATES
[ excerpts ]
Petitioner, Montgomery Blair Sibley (“Sibley”), invoking 28 U.S.C. §1746, states that the matters stated herein are true under penalty of perjury, moves to vacate the Court’s December 19, 2012, order of dismissal and, pursuant to the fundamental right to an impartial tribunal, due process, 28 U.S.C. §455(b)(5)(i)1 and/or 28 U.S.C. §1442, moves for entry of an order disqualifying the Honorable John D Bates from further involvement in this matter, and for grounds in support thereof states: [...]
I. THE LAW OF DISQUALIFICATION/RECUSAL
Disqualification of judges of this Court is first commanded by a litigant’s fundamental right to an impartial tribunal which pre-dates – and is preserved by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to – the Constitution. [...]
II. THE FACTS AND REASONS MANDATING DISQUALIFICATION/RECUSAL
As for the §144 bias or prejudice, I believes that Honorable John D Bates has a personal bias or prejudice either against me and/or in favor of the Respondent. The reasons for the belief that such bias or prejudice exists is found in his Memorandum Order of December 19, 2012. In particular, in that opinion, the Honorable John D Bates:
a. Mis-applies the pejorative term “birther” to me demonstrating his complete lack of understanding of the issues I raise and his utilization of ad hominem reasoning in adjudicating my claim. Indeed, he continues by mis-characterizing my argument as based upon the claim that Obama was “supposedly was not born in the United States.” In fact, I make no such claim but instead raise the incontestable issue that Obama’s father was not a U.S. Citizen and the documents that support Obama’s claim to be born in Hawaii appear to be forgeries.
b. Refuses to allow oral argument to enlighten him on points of fact and law that he clearly misunderstood.
c. Patently violated LCvR 65.1(d). On November 14, 2012, I filed my “Verified Motions for Preliminary Hearing and Expedited Discovery and Demand for Hearing”. In that motion, I specifically requested a hearing pursuant to LCvR 65.1(d)3 which obligates Judge Bates to rule upon the Motion for Preliminary injunction within twenty-one (21) days. Yet, thirty-five (35) days later, Judge Bates had failed to discharge his obligation imposed by LCvR 65.1(d). [...]
Here, the Honorable John D Bates is knowingly assisting Defendant Obama by refusing me access to the Grand Jury to present evidence of his criminal behavior in order to hinder or prevent Defendant Obama’s trial or punishment. As such, the Honorable John D Bates is arguably an “accessory after the fact” and thus his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” in making rulings in this matter. [...]
FULL MOTION CONTINUED BELOW OR HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/118443643
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogs...dge-bates.html