25 December 2010

KingCast open letter to Daniel Pearl Freedom of Press Act author Adam Schiff and President Barack Obama regarding Senator Kelly Ayotte Free Press lawsuit; Wikipedia coverup & censorship.

Dear Honorable Statesman Schiff and President Obama:

I am honored to write you and pleased that you share the same commitment to Free Press as I do. The Daniel Pearl Freedom of Press Act is a crucial development on the International landscape, yet it is somewhat ironic that we take basic Free Press principles for granted here in the U.S.. The Democrats have been quite reasonable when it comes to me, as noted in my press picture at the Obama/Deval Patrick rally and at an earlier Deval Patrick rally (watch the video) but there are problems coming from the Republicans and Tea Party people:

Here is an entry I filed on Wikipedia today after some people on Wikipedia seemed unsure as to why it is important that all reporters are granted access to publicly-advertised political rallies that are held on commercial property subject to substantial State and Local licensing and regulation. GOP and Tea Party racists and haters of Free Press cannot selectively deny media access on viewpoint and race-based criteria pursuant to NAACP v. Thompson,  648 F.Supp. 195 D.Md.,(1986), as I noted on this Statewide Public Access television program Capitol Access TV Episode 142Meanwhile, Wikipedia removed this post in an act of outright censorship:
===Free Press===
The Nashua Telegraph is the State's second-largest newspaper according to Wikipedia. The newspaper noted that Christopher King "KingCast.net" was escorted out by the police at a GOP/Joe Arpaio rally after he attempted to interview Kelly Ayotte at a publicly-advertised political rally. Mr. King has sued Friends of Kelly Ayotte, New Hampshire and Nashua GOP and Nashua Police Department for being refused admittance to that event and two other GOP events. The case is before the New Hampshire Federal District Court. Among the legal questions the suit could potentially raise is whether a private gathering that vigorously seeks media coverage can bar or expel some reporters but not others. http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/887281-196/blogger-sues-ayotte-others-over-access.html
Direct link to Plaintiff's lawsuit in KingCast v. Friends of Kelly Ayotte, GOP and Nashua PD, U.S. Dist. NH 2010-CV-501, and direct links to Plaintiff's Memoranda in Opposition to some rather specious Motions to Dismiss. Videos are embedded in the documents and at the end of the Memoranda hosted on wepapers. 

Direct link to Plaintiff's 28 U.S.C. §455 Motion for Disclosure as Defense Counsel Jack Middleton was Judge Landya B. McCafferty's boss and Kelly Ayotte's boss, as a founder of McLane, Graf et al. It is widely believed that this firm, which donated generously to Senator Ayotte in her campaign run, also directly helped Her Honor in her ascension to the Bench that occurred earlier this year. This association was not disclosed to Plaintiff when it certainly should have been, particularly as outgoing Magistrate Judge Muirhead -- himself a McLane, Graf Disciple -- served as a mentor to Judge McCafferty in the transition. That doesn't smell right, but then again neither does the fact that Kelly Ayotte won't disavow any support she receives from online house of hate "Niggermania," who said my case "smells like a nigger," watch the video.

Read these threatening emails from Defense Counsel and my response set them on their tuchii; note that they tried to remove Jack Middleton from the chain but I put him right back in there.

Perhaps these are some of the reasons why U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan's staff is following my Tweets and well they should: This case is headed straight for them. As someone who has worked for the government as an Assistant Attorney General and as someone who has written for and edited large and medium-sized daily and weekly newspapers I will not be denied my Fundamental Right to attend and report, and to gather and to disseminate information just as the Plaintiff's won in NAACP v. Thompson,  648 F.Supp. 195 D.Md.,(1986).

Here are the Defendants' cited cases that don't amount to a hill of beans. They are not on point and wholly irrelevant to the factual and legal backdrop of this case:

For example, on the First Amendment claims Nashua PD 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).

Lastly, here is the YouTube video relative to the myopic efforts of Wikipedia to eliminate any discussion of Senator Ayotte's stance on Free Press.


Update: The wikstupidia tools are at it again. This time it is yet another excuse when someone following the issue (whom I only met last month) who agrees with me attempted to post to the "talk" forums, a place where they put things they hope will go away. They locked this individual out for a whole MONTH because s/he dared to support the KingCast position, and s/he assured me that no zombie programs were used at all, just a concerned citizen trying to post.
Another would-be poster (Fourth Estate) sent me these attempts to edit but the vermin scumbag hypocrite sellouts removed all of this as well. This all begs the question: Who is really running the Internet and who is paying or threatening or influence-peddling wikipedia to bury this issue?
 

5 comments:

Christopher King said...

This case was all-so-simple for them. They got the judge they wanted and she was going to ding me up on the TRO Hearing, then the Court would just run me out on a Motion to Dismiss, another Civil Rights case slammed in NH District Court, nothing to see here folks move along.

First they stalled until a Thursday or Friday with whether or not they were going to remove the case to Federal Court. Mary Tenn was supposed to be Ayotte's Counsel, that's why I wrote this post about her.

They then changed counsel and Attorney Cullen told me that the Federal Forum was going to be better for them.

Well hell yes, when you change counsel to where the Judge's ex boss (Jack Middleton) is running the show for Defendants, and he and the previous judge (Muirhead) who mentored the new judge (McCafferty) are all from McLane, Graf (3 ducks in a row) then you damn well better believe the Federal Forum is going to be "better for you," particularly when you wait until the hearing date to show Plaintiff what cases you plan to argue.

********

I stand resolute. They go for the jugular I'll go for the jugular.

I'm not going to tolerate any more abuses and all of these issues will be presented to this court, the next court, and to SCOTUS.

All because I wanted to ask Kelly Ayotte a couple of questions.

-The KingCaster.

Christopher King said...

Kirby Award Club:

Robert E. Kirby Award
Frank Rowe Kenison Award | Robert E. Kirby Award

The Robert E. Kirby Award was established in 1996 to honor the memory of Bob Kirby, a young lawyer "of great skill, civility and good humor" who died that year at the age of 35. Kirby was an attorney with the Concord law firm of Gallagher, Callahan & Gartrell.

The purpose of the award is to honor Bob's memory and to remind all of us that decency, courtesy and perspective neither inhibits nor defeats excellent advocacy. The Kirby Award recipient is an attorney 35 years old or younger who demonstrates the traits of civility, courtesy, perspective and excellent advocacy.

[As if Kelly Ayotte ever displayed any of those attributes when she filed her frivolous cases against me as NAACP Legal Chair, cases that were all dismissed after I schooled her on First Amendment Law]

2005 Mary E. Tenn, Tenn And Tenn
2004 Kelly Ayotte, Attorney General
2003 Jennifer Parent, McLane, Graf Middleton
2002 John T. Pendleton, Gottesman & Hollis
2001 Joseph N. Laplante, U.S. Atty Office
1999 James J. Tenn, Jr., Tenn And Tenn

Christopher King said...

Christopher King to Brian, jennifer.parent, jack.middleton, gmacdonald, bcc:

show details 7:16 AM (0 minutes ago)
Top of the morning Counselors.

No more Motion for Sanctions to discuss:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2010/12/kingcast-christmas-present-for-justice.html

I will be concurrently seeking Congressional Relief from Kelly Ayotte's oppression:

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2010/12/kingcast-and-capitol-access-tv-discuss.html

Fundamental Rights are all we have in this Country, and when you mess with mine you will earn yourselves a life long battle.
--
Christopher King, J.D.
http://KingCast.net -- Reel News for Real People
617.543.8085m

25 DECEMBER 2010

KingCast open letter to Daniel Pearl Freedom of Press Act author Adam Schiff and President Barack Obama regarding Senator Kelly Ayotte Free Press lawsuit; Wikipedia coverup & censorship.

Christopher King said...

Dear Congressman Schiff:

Dems and progressive Republicans need to follow this and legislation should be enacted, thank you for your time and review, I will telephone you today, 29 Dec. 2010.

http://christopher-king.blogspot.com/2010/12/kingcast-open-letter-to-daniel-pearl.html

25 DECEMBER 2010

KingCast open letter to Daniel Pearl Freedom of Press Act author Adam Schiff and President Barack Obama regarding Senator Kelly Ayotte Free Press lawsuit; Wikipedia coverup & censorship.

Free Press lawsuit v. Kelly Ayotte
http://tinyurl.com/39qvj6f

Motion for Disclosure/Recusal per 28 U.S.C. §455
http://tinyurl.com/24xwols

......Perhaps these are some of the reasons why U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan's staff is following my Tweets and well they should: This case is headed straight for them. As someone who has worked for the government as an Assistant Attorney General and as someone who has written for and edited large and medium-sized daily and weekly newspapers I will not be denied my Fundamental Right to attend and report, and to gather and to disseminate information just as the Plaintiff's won in NAACP v. Thompson, 648 F.Supp. 195 D.Md.,(1986).

Here are the Defendants' cited cases that don't amount to a hill of beans. They are not on point and wholly irrelevant to the factual and legal background of this case:

For example, on the First Amendment claims Nashua PD 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).

bizuns said...

Wikipedia double standard http://bizuns.com/wikipediadoublestandardfail