Aimee Cooper Department of Justice, Erie Doctrine, James McGibney Bullyville, James McGibney Rosendin Electric, Jason Lee Van Dyke, Jeffrey Dorrell, Marc Randazza, McGibney v Retzlaff, Neal Rauhauser, Retzlaff v Van Dyke, The Proud Boys, Thomas Retzlaff, US Supreme Court
Good day, eh? Well not so good if you are revenge pornographer / accused pedophile James McGibney (who we don’t like) of Round Rock, Texas, who (at long last), will finally be questioned under oath regarding more than 6 1/2 years’ worth of wild, outlandish court filings and public claims that he has made regarding your American Heroes & Honorary Admins of the BV Files Neal Rauhauser, Thomas Retzlaff, Lane Lipton, Lora Lusher, @Miss Anon News, Jennifer D’Alessandro, Jane Does 1 – 5, and much, much more!!
Or will he?
It seems as if the Federal Government is attempting to weigh in and prevent this. Will they be successful? Not a chance! But the drama unfolding is pretty exciting and it is all 100% VERIFIED!!
PLUS WE HAVE BIG NEWS ON A FEDERAL CASE THAT IS PRESENTLY PENDING BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT.
BUT FIRST SOME UPDATES….
As many of you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters will recall, our blog server is hosted overseas in lovely Dubai, UAE. While being hosted in Dubai has numerous advantages…
…it does come with more than a few hassles. One big hassle that you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters are well aware of is the annual Ramadan take-over of this blog by our ‘neighbors’ in ISIS who are co-located on our server. This has lead to accusations of “death threats”, claims of car bombs, and fatwas being made against your American Heroes & Honorary Admins of the BV Files Neal Rauhauser, Thomas Retzlaff, and Jeffrey Dorrell by reputable lawyers like John Morgan of Beaumont, Texas. CHECK IT OUT!!
And claims of ‘death threats’ made by equally reputable private investigators such as Philip Klein of Nederland, Texas.
Such lunacy only results in a great deal of unnecessary work for the FBI and the super secret grand juries that Morgan, Philip Klein, and James McGibney (who we don’t like) constantly blather on about that they claim are busy investigating Retzlaff “and others” for various and sundry misdeeds of no import whatsoever.
The fact that neither Rauhauser, Retzlaff or Dorrell have anything to do with this blog makes no difference to the mind of a vexatious crazy person like Morgan who not only is an admitted perjurer, but is literally a drug addled crazy person who was ORDERED into mental health / substance abuse counseling TWICE by the State Bar of Texas as a direct result of grievances filed by Retzlaff against him!
In any event, in order to keep our ISIS neighbors happy, we have agreed to post stuff from them from time to time. So in keeping with recent events involving reports of civil unrest across America, we bring you the following special report. CHECK IT OUT!!
WASHINGTON — As the United States works through its immense internal challenges with human rights, equality, and government use of force, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad seeks to help the US in the same way the US helped during the recent Syrian civil war.
“We’re sending advisors from our elite special operations units to, you know, help foster peace,” Assad told reporters while hiding a smirk. “I can’t tell you how valuable it was to have a foreign influence stoking the fires during a period of violent unrest. The least we can do is return the favor.”
Assad’s aides exchanged high fives in a symbol of solidarity.
Syrian peacekeeping support for rebels in the US includes combat training and air cover, necessary features of any peace effort and not an attempt to foster chaos or regime change for their own interests.
Assad emphasizes that the American and Syrian civil conflicts have their differences.
“Sometimes you have a country that values the status quo over freedom and individual human life, and when people finally speak up for change, they’re met with unreasonable force, so both sides feel required to escalate,” Assad noted.
“And sometimes you have a shitshow like America, it can go either way, really.”
Intelligence personnel across the Middle East are closely monitoring events in the United States, as civil unrest continues spreading in the aftermath of the death of 46-year-old George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officers. Officials in the Middle East have expressed concern the so-called American Spring could further destabilize North America.
“Say what you will about their government, the United States is strategic terrain—not just in the Western Hemisphere, but across the globe,” Abu Hasan Mahmoud, an analyst with Egypt’s General Intelligence Service, said. “They are a major exporter of popular music, cinema, and fast food. But, it is not just Hollywood and McDonald’s; we love the American people and want to see them prosper.”
“It’s important to remember,” continued Mahmoud, “we can’t risk this craziness bleeding over to Canada or Mexico.”
Officials in the region have long kept an eye on the United States. Longstanding concerns that the volatile mix of unemployment, a problematic record of civil rights, and a charismatic national leader widely seen as unstable could create a powder keg were validated last month as protests and riots broke out across the country.
Not everyone is convinced of the magnanimity of the intelligence services. Some see darker and more nefarious motivations at work. Ahmed al-Mostafa is a civil rights lawyer from Alexandria and expressed skepticism of the intelligence services’ intentions.
“They are not concerned about the well-being of the American people,” said al-Mostafa. “They only see opportunity and a chance to prop up some tin pot dictator who will just do whatever is good for Egypt. This is nothing more than a scheme to exchange blood for oily fast food.”
Sources in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria have confirmed they are also closely monitoring events in the United States.
“No one wants to talk about it publicly,” said a Lebanese intelligence officer who requested to remain anonymous, “but these people just aren’t suited to govern themselves. They need help from more advanced societies.”
JASON VAN DYKE – NEW ASSASSINATION PLOT????
Could it be true, that current Nazi / former attorney Jason Lee Van Dyke is accused of being involved in a July 2016 political assassination? According to newly filed court records – yes. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Petitioner's Amended Rule 404 Notice
Keep in mind that this is not the first time that Van Dyke has been involved in a plot to murder people.
EXCERPTS FROM AN FBI AUDIO RECORDING:
BY THE WAY….
Does anyone care about the tears of a Nazi?
And how did super special agent Wicevich respond? CHECK IT OUT!!!
BIG EVENTS HAPPENING IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ANTI-SLAPP CASE….
A federal appeals court has rejected adult film star Stormy Daniels defamation suit against President Donald Trump and upheld the award of sanctions.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Friday, July 31, 2020, the lower court’s decision from October 2018 to dismiss the case and award President Trump mandatory sanctions and attorney’s fees pursuant to the Texas anti-SLAPP law!
U.S. District Judge S. James Otero had ruled that Trump’s tweet at the center of the case was “rhetorical hyperbole” protected by the First Amendment instead of the defamation alleged.
Daniels, born Stephanie Clifford, alleged that she was threatened in a Las Vegas casino parking lot in 2011 after agreeing to cooperate with a magazine that intended to publish a story on her alleged intimate relationship with Trump in 2006.
Daniels sued over an April 18, 2018, tweet in which Trump said the sketch of a man who allegedly threatened Clifford in 2011 was a “total con job.”
Trump has frequently denounced the 9th Circuit as a bastion of liberalism and has claimed its rulings are driven by political bias against him. However, the three-judge panel that ruled unanimously in Trump’s favor on the libel suit is composed of Democratic appointees: Clinton nominees Sidney Thomas and Kim Wardlaw and Obama nominee Jacqueline Nguyen
The court’s opinion Friday also addressed a more arcane legal issue about a special procedure Trump’s lawyers used to knock Daniels’ suit out at an early stage. A Los Angeles-based federal court trial judge ruled that Texas law applied in the case and that Trump’s lawyers could avail themselves of a state law there that discourages libel lawsuits about matters of public controversy and debate.
Because of a ruling from the federal appeals court that covers Texas, federal courts in that state don’t apply the special Texas statute, often called an anti-SLAPP law. However, the 9th Circuit does apply those kinds of laws.
Asked about Friday’s ruling, Daniel’s attorney Clark Brewster faulted that aspect of the decision, arguing that the 9th Circuit should have deferred to the court that handles Texas, the 5th Circuit.
“To reach the result set forth in its ‘unpublished decision’ the 9th Circuit had to break with established rules of comity,” Brewster said. “Ms. Clifford has directed us to proceed to seek further review by the 9th Circuit, en banc. If that effort fails we will likely seek review by the Supreme Court.” (Unfortunately for him, Tom Retzlaff is already there first and his case is the one that will decide this issue for the entire country!)
The BIG TAKE-AWAY from the 9th Circuit’s decision is this:
The TCPA is indistinguishable from California’s law in all material respects.
As many of you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters will recall, the California anti-SLAPP statute has been around for almost 30 years. Specifically, in 1992 California enacted Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16, a statute intended to frustrate SLAPPs by providing a quick and inexpensive defense. It provides for a special motion that a defendant can file at the outset of a lawsuit to strike a complaint when it arises from conduct that falls within the rights of petition or free speech.
The statute expressly applies to any writing or speech made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law, but there is no requirement that the writing or speech be promulgated directly to the official body. It also applies to speech in a public forum about an issue of public interest and to any other petition or speech conduct about an issue of public interest.
In the case involving your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Thomas Retzlaff and the $100 million defamation / SLAPP lawsuit filed by Nazi / pedo guy Jason Lee Van Dyke, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held in Klocke v. Watson, 936 F.3d 240, 244–47 (5th Cir. 2019) that the Texas anti-SLAPP law (called the Texas Citizens Participation Act or TCPA) did not apply in federal court because of something called the Erie doctrine.
FUN FACT: The Erie doctrine is a fundamental legal doctrine of civil procedure in the United States which mandates that a federal court called upon to resolve a dispute not directly implicating a federal question (most commonly when sitting in diversity jurisdiction, but also when applying supplemental jurisdiction to claims factually related to a federal question or in an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy) must apply state substantive law.
The doctrine follows from the Supreme Court landmark decision in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938). The case overturned Swift v. Tyson, which allowed federal judges sitting in a state to ignore the common law local decisions of state courts in the same state in diversity actions.
There are two main objectives of the Erie decision: (1) to discourage forum shopping among litigants, and (2) to avoid inequitable administration of the laws. Broadly speaking, the second objective is sometimes referred to as “vertical uniformity” and is rooted in the idea that in a given state, the outcome of the litigation should not be grossly different just because a litigant filed a claim in a state court rather than a federal court or vice versa.
The Erie doctrine today applies regardless of how the federal court may hear a state claim. Whether the federal court encounters a state law issue in diversity jurisdiction, supplemental jurisdiction, or bankruptcy jurisdiction, the federal court must honor state common law when deciding state law issues.
In effect, when the U.S. Constitution does not control and Congress has not legislated (or cannot legislate) on a topic, then the laws of the states necessarily govern and state judge-made rules are equally binding on the federal courts as state statutes.
DOUBLE FUN FACT: The Erie case involved a fundamental question of federalism and the jurisdiction of federal courts in the United States. In 1789, the Congress passed a law still in effect today called the Rules of Decision Act (28 U.S.C. § 1652), which states that the laws of a state furnish the rules of decision for a federal court sitting in that state. Thus, a federal court in Texas, hearing a case based on diversity (as opposed to a federal question), has to follow the laws of the applicable state in resolving a case before it. Which is why state anti-SLAPP laws should apply in federal courts in those states that have such laws.
In a nut shell, the 9th Circuit held that the district court correctly concluded under the Erie doctrine that the motion to dismiss procedures of the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA) — Texas’s version of an anti-SLAPP law — apply in federal court.
We have long held that analogous procedures in California’s anti-SLAPP law apply in federal court, and the TCPA is indistinguishable from California’s law in all material respects.
Though we recognize the Fifth Circuit recently held that the TCPA does not apply in federal court, the reasoning of the Fifth Circuit’s opinion cannot be reconciled with our circuit’s anti-SLAPP precedent. We are bound to follow our own precedent, which requires us to apply the TCPA.
Here is the decision from the 9th Circuit:
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Clifford v Trump - 9th Circuit Opinion - 7-31-2020
So why is this a big win for Retzlaff? Because it further cements in stone the split among the various U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals as to whether or not state anti-SLAPP laws apply in federal court. And it specifically applies with a circuit split as to how one state’s anti-SLAPP law applies in federal courts.
The attorney for Nazi punk Van Dyke is Marc Randazza, who is also a white supremacist that is a disgusting sexual pervert who likes to steal money from his clients. Randazza is attempting to argue that the U.S. Supreme Court should deny review of the Retzlaff v Van Dyke case. Randazza claims that that no case could ever helpfully address the applicability of state anti-SLAPP laws in federal court because “each state’s statute has its own distinctive features.” See page 3 of the opposition brief below.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Van Dyke Brief in Opposition to Petition for Certiorari
As recently explained to us by Some Random Person We’ve Never Heard Of Before,
Their distinctions make little difference to the circuit split. The problem is not that different circuits applying the same legal rule to different state provisions have reached different results. That could be no problem at all. The problem is that different circuits apply different legal rules to similar, if not completely identical, state provisions to reach contradictory results.
As the 9th Circuit recognized, it employs a version of “conflict preemption” analysis between federal and state rules while those circuits on the other side of the split use a version of “field preemption” analysis. The decision from the 9th Circuit in the Clifford v Trump case only further highlights this problem.
These dramatically different approaches lead to conflicting results which only the Supreme Court can resolve.
As you can see, Your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Thomas Retzlaff has the continued support and assistance from most of America’s largest and influential media organizations. That support is only going to increase as the case gets further teed up for arguments before our nation’s highest court.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***SCOTUS Amicus brief - Retzlaff v Van Dyke - 7-8-2020
Already Retzlaff has the love and support of our President having recently met with his staff members at The White House during a January visit before the virus rolled into town in order to plan out this Supreme Court case in which the University of Virginia’s School of Law Supreme Court Litigation Clinic is heavily involved.
Has James McGibney (who we don’t like) ever set foot inside of The White House? NO!
US Supreme Court Petition - Van Dyke v Retzlaff
One thing that will never not be funny is that it looks like Marc Randazza will have ZERO opportunities at arguing this case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Why is that, you ask? Well, it is because Randazza was recently hit with yet more State Bar discipline for wildly unethical – and illegal – conduct. You see, Marc Randazza is a thief who likes to steal money from his clients. While a recently filed Report & Recommendation from a Florida Supreme Court referee recommended that Randazza be placed on probation for his crimes, we have it on super good authority that the Florida State Bar will be requesting that the Florida Supreme Court overrule that recommendation and will be seeking disbarment. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***FL State Bar v Marc Randazza - Report of Referee
The U.S. Supreme Court has understandably very high standards when it comes to ethical conduct of those allowed to argue before it. Nazis, sexual perverts, and people who think it is a good idea to steal from their clients and double-cross them are totally NOT WELCOME.
We will, of course, keep you all updated on any further developments.
This was just filed with the U.S. Supreme Court this afternoon. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***
Retzlaff Reply brief
THIS WILL NEVER NOT BE FUNNY….
VERY BAD NEWS FOR JASON LEE VAN DYKE….
It looks like Van Dyke is about to get poured out of federal court and any chance at winning his $100 million defamation SLAPP lawsuit against Retzlaff because it turns out (big surprise) that Van Dyke has absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support his claims!!
This, of course, is the same BIG PROBLEM that James McGibney (who we don’t like) had when he filed his series of SLAPP lawsuits against Retzlaff in which he, too, made a bunch of wild and outlandish claims.
So now Van Dyke is having to respond to a NO EVIDENCE MOTION FOR FINAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***ECF 194 - Retzlaff's mtn for summary judgment
“In our judicial system, ‘the public has a right to every man’s evidence.’” Trump v. Vance, 591 U.S. ___, ___, 2020 WL 3848062, at * 4 (July 9, 2020).
James McGibney (who we don’t like) is a revenge pornographer who lives in Round Rock, Texas, at this house right here:
Since around 2012, McGibney has been involved with the sexual blackmail of young girls and their families through the posting of the intimate photographs of these young girls and defamatory comments about them on his Cheaterville.com website.
McGibney is a close associate and supporter of former attorney Jason Lee Van Dyke, who is the leader of the Proud Boys white supremacist street gang. In fact, McGibney is sooo close to Van Dyke and is such a big supporter that Van Dyke listed McGIbney as being his “key witness” in a $100 million defamation / SLAPP lawsuit that he filed against your American Hero & Honorary Admin of the BV Files Thomas Retzlaff! CHECK IT OUT!!
In response to Van Dyke’s identification of James McGibney (who we don’t like) as a person with knowledge of relevant facts and as a trial witness on his behalf, Retzlaff and his lawyers at the Hanszen Laporte law firm in Houston issued a deposition subpoena so that they can question McGibney under oath about these claims.
Once McGibney found out that there was a subpoena for him, what did this man who claims to be a former Marine do? Why he went on the run and hide out from the process servers!!
Then the strangest thing of all happened – the US Attorney’s Office filed a motion seeking to quash this deposition subpoena. Specifically, Aimee Cooper claims that, because McGibney is an “FBI witness”, he is somehow immunized from having to be questioned under oath about anything that he has said or claimed. CHECK IT OUT!!
ECF 188 - Govts mtn to quash McGibney subpoena
ECF 189 - Response in Opp to USA's mtn to quash
Of course, the usual knuckleheads from the peanut gallery chime in thinking that something super grand has only just now been revealed…
FUN FACT: Aimee Cooper has only been employed by the Department of Justice since September 2019. Before that she spent about 3 years working as an employment law attorney for the Department of Defense. Earlier she had spent some time as a Navy JAG officer. Aimee is a graduate of Creighton University, which, as everybody knows is ranked No. 133 (tie) in Best Law Schools by US News & World Report.
DOUBLE FUN FACT: Stetson University is ranked No. 105.
Make of that what you will, dear reader.
The problem for Aimee Cooper is that, for more than 33 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that,
Where the evidence consists of the testimony of individuals whose memory might be faulty or who, in fact, might be perjurers or persons motivated by malice, vindictiveness, intolerance, prejudice, or jealousy, the individual’s right to show that it is untrue depends on the rights of confrontation and cross-examination.
And Retzlaff responded with a motion seeking to compel McGibney’s deposition.
ECF 193 - D's motion to compel McGibney Depo
Furthermore, it looks like, regardless as to what happens in the federal court, McGibney will have to appear anyways for a deposition in that Texas LOLsuit he filed against Retzlaff in Fort Worth (you guys remember, the one where McGibney was hit with over $1.3 million in sanctions and attorney’s fees). Judge Cosby has told everyone that a final trial on the matter will be taking place in September. Furthermore, Judge Cosby has made it abundantly clear that additional TCPA sanctions are definately on the table.
So because Neal Rauhauser had to appear at a deposition, so does James McGibney. CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***Notice of McGibney deposition - 7-29-2020
So James “Jimmy the PissBoy” McGibney blinked and filed a motion to quash his deposition. He claims that the only issue left to be decided is attorney’s fees. He is wrong. Judge Cosby has made it clear that TCPA sanctions are on the table (something having to do with the word “mandatory sanctions” in the statute).
McGibney also claims he should not have to testify because he is a super secret FBI witness and that the FBI is investigating Retzlaff and Rauhauser for the past seven years and that nobody should ever get to question McGibney under oath about his claims.
CHECK IT OUT!!
*** CLICK ON IMAGE TO VIEW ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE ***McGibney's 2nd motion to quash (no exhibits)
What happens next is anyone’s guess. But one thing is certain: McGibney will be questioned under oath one way or another, and when he is, we will bring it to you all in living color!
Well, this article has gone on long enough. So we hope that you, our teeming MILLIONS of readers, listeners, and supporters are all doing well and staying safe. After all, without you guys, there would be no need for us to do what we do.