21 December 2010

KingCast and three wise men say, "Here come the threats by Jack Middleton and the rest of Kelly Ayotte's lawyers in Free Press racial lawsuit when they are busted for bad arguments."

Take a look at this email exchange between Jack Middleton, Jennifer Parent, Gordon MacDonald, Brian Cullen and me. They are so flipping upset that I outed their bogus arguments and the potential conflict of interest and duty to disclose that they now threaten me with Motions for Attorney Fees to defend my Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions as well as my Motion for Disclosure  because Jack Middleton was both Kelly Ayotte's boss and Magistrate Judge Landya McCafferty's boss. These pleadings are all housed here, and as noted in Capitol Access TV Episode 142 "Reel News."
They are now saying that they are even going to seek Attorney fees in response to my Memorandum in Opposition to their frivolous Motions to Dismiss when I'm the only one who pointed to cases on point in the Federal Circuits, and when they only claim that NAACP v. Thompson "may be distinguished" but they never did distinguish it. They think, like most Big Law Firms against a little guy like me, that they can just say whatever they want to and get away with it.

For example, on the First Amendment claims Cullen cites to State v. Dupuy, 118 N.H. 848 (1978), a case that does not involve political rallies at which some members of the media were allowed but not others. Dupuy was a trespasser at a nuclear power plant -- not a political rally attended by other invited reporters. And Defendant's cited case of Kay v. NH Democratic Party, 821 F.2d  31 (1st Cir. 1987) fails because Kay was attempting to barge in and take a place on the podium, and Plaintiff already agrees that such activity is not supported by law. Again, in the political context the NAACP cases are most instructive, and the same exact holding would be contemplated by  Invisible Empire of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, Maryland Chapter v. Town of Thurmont, MD. 700 F.Supp. 281 (1998).

That is complete crap from these people, sheer and utter crap.

You can see more about how these people operate and the big money they give to Kelly Ayotte in yesterday's post, in which I note that she still has substantial contacts with her esrtwhile colleagues as does Judge McCafferty, and ask the reasonable question: 

"Did Jack Middleton and McLane, Graf counsel Kelly Ayotte not to file her mandatory disclosure U.S. Senate Financial Statement?"

Excerpt from the emails, the full boat is linked here.
It is not that I disagree with your right to issue counter-arguments. You can and should do all of that at an appropriate time, as my Memoranda indicates. As to my request for Disclosure, there isn't an attorney I've met who finds my request unreasonable.

As to the hyperlinks I will review them, however I believe most if not all of them go to videos that will never be altered and that may be noted by the YouTube upload information. I will check on those links and get back with you no later than Wednesday morning. As to your threats of Attorney fees, I will await your formal letter and we will proceed on that basis.


It is not just the fact that all of you made counter arguments, it is the fact that you truncated and gerrymandered what I pled in so doing, as I noted on the public access show currently running.


Again, I didn't fall off a turnip truck yesterday or any other day for that matter. Unless of Course you want to argue that somehow cases like this are irrelevant because they occur in another District.

Paws For A Treat LLC v. Christmas Tree Shop, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3312

HN1 For at least two years after taking the bench, a judge should recuse himself from cases in which his former firm appears. Since 2000, I have maintained frequent contact with only a handful of Day, Berry lawyers. The firm represented my wife and me in a minor matter that concluded nearly three years ago. In short, I have no present relationship with Day, Berry or with the vast majority of its attorneys.

That is not true in this case because I know Her Honor has frequent contact with many McLane, Graf Attorneys. And her Honor has been on the Bench for several months, not years. And while there was a break between her tenure with the firm, I am entitled to know the extent of her ongoing contacts with that firm and I am entitled to know whether Jack Middleton or anyone else at that firm supported her ascension to the Bench because that certainly would present a question on impartiality then, wouldn't it.

Yes. It. Would.
But wait, there's more.

This is what SHOULD have happened, I should have been told:

George N. Pegula Agency, Inc. v. Monumental Life I..., 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23196

2 James Rogers, counsel for Monumental, has submitted an affidavit, which provides:
I have a distinct recollection that, in a telephone conference with the Court, in which Lawrence Ludwig, Esq. was participating on behalf of the plaintiff, Judge Vanaskie noted the fact of his prior membership in the Dilworth firm........ In particular, I recall advising Pegula's counsel of my prior relationship with the Dilworth firm, asking Pegula's counsel if there was any objection to my continued handling of the case, and Pegula's counsel indicating that he had no objection.
(Emphasis added.)

Did Jack or anyone else at McLane help Her Honor to the bench or not. Answer the question. Truthfully and fully to me right now, and I will consider withdrawing my Motion.

Christopher King, J.D.

http://KingCast.net -- Reel News for Real People


Christopher King said...

See now I have released two of my claims, and if I release the Motion for Sanctions pending a ruling from the Court, that leaves the Motion for Disclosure, and if this Court spanks me for asking about that, then so be it.

Note that I'm not even filing a Motion for Recusal, just checking it out, things that they know goddamn well they should have told me about because Judge McCafferty had ongoing contact with many McLane, Graf lawyers on different panels, and it is foolish to think that Jack Middleton or others at McLane didn't help her get to the bench, it's like any other job you apply for you give a couple of references, and for Her Honor her last two references are the Public Defender's office and, drumroll please.... McLane, Graf, home of Kelly Ayotte prior to her ascension to NH AG.

I'm not going to take this bullshit, I am telling Jack right now and I will tell it to his face, we're going toe-to-toe on this, Counselor. You've got all the money, power and influence in the World, but you know I am right.


Christopher King said...

Three Wise Men appear courtesy of Om Restaurant.

Christopher King said...

Christopher King to Brian, jack.middleton, gmacdonald, jennifer.parent, bcc:
show details 4:51 PM (0 minutes ago)


I have no intentions of removing any links for several reasons:

1. The links to cases online need not be removed, the cases are what the cases are. If an online link fails to work 50 years from now the case is still in the Federal Reporters. I attached unreported cases as required by convention in any legal pleading.

2. The links to YouTube videos will always come back to that video. I would be willing to refile these documents with embedded videos, however, as YouTube could conceivably not be around for 50 or 100 or 200 years so you have a point there, I would appreciate your written assent by tomorrow to embed the videos and waive objection to page limit changes as it may run 26 pages after that process.

3. My legal team and I look forward to receipt of your Rule 11 warning letter, and exactly how it is you intend to seek Attorney Fees on my Memoranda in Opposition, and to have me scolded for asking about the substantial contacts between McLane, Graf and Judge McCafferty.

4. Don't leave Jack out of this email chain again. He is a Counselor of Record. As I say, I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday, or any other day for that matter. All I wanted to do was ask a few questions, and I offered to settle. You guys wanted the fight, you're going to get the fight.

Very Truly Yours,
Christopher King, J.D.

http://KingCast.net -- Reel News for Real People

Christopher King said...

Dear Wiki Editors:

You guys removed my comment about Kelly Ayotte re: "Free Press"

It was short, factual and unbiased and verified by a substantial New England newspaper.


Why did you do this, I demand an explanation because you routinely publish the fact that lawsuits are pending against people. This removal smells like fear, or perhaps someone bought you out?

Prove otherwise.

Christopher King, J.D.
http://KingCast.net -- Reel News for Real People.