-->

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

My next steps . . .

Yesterday, the Supreme Court docketed the denial of my Application.  They gave no reason for the denial of my request to review the refusal of the District Court Clerk to file my Motions for Modification of the Restraining Order which I believe prevents me from releasing information relevant to the present election cycle.

So now what is my next step?  Torn as I am that I should not be gagged from First Amendment political speech by a restraining order that I am being denied the opportunity to even asked to be dissolved, I am a Doctor of Laws and cannot flaunt the Court's authority easily.  Hence, I will continue to press Obama Supreme Court nominee Chief Judge Garland of the D.C. Circuit Court to expedite the resolution of the Petition I placed before him on March  9, 2016. 

Chief Judge Garland and I have tangled before which is why I believe he is hoping I will release the records so I can be arrested for criminal contempt of court.  That most certainly would silence me as there are no keyboards or Internet in jail. Notably, the underlying determination of what Chief Judge Garland has permitted on his watch is deemed "confidential" under Rule 23 and thus sealed from public view.  Of course, Chief Judge Garland has the authority under Rule 23(a) to: "disclose the existence of a proceeding under these Rules when necessary or appropriate to maintain public confidence in the Judiciary’s ability to redress misconduct or disability."  How about it Chief Judge Garland?  Will you release the existence of the proceeding I initiated so the public confidence can be restored?  I thought not.

My "confidence" is shaken in the Judiciary's ability to redress misconduct.  How about your confidence?  And how convenient for the nominee to the bench of the unaccountable, non-elected, super-legislature running our Country to keep his misconduct in the shadows.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

They can't arrest you if someone hacks into your computer. You are not responsible. You had to know that they would never comply. Why would you even try? Beat them at their own game. Have wikileaks or anonymous hack you. This is getting ridiculous. Starting to think that you didn't really think this all through. Why didn't you have a plan B???

Anonymous said...

You know they're going to stall until the conventions are over. Time for Plan B, that is, if you have one.

Attorney said...

Support your choice not to disregard rule of law, in spite of, or in keeping with amo probos. Keep trying -- may be relevant for future decisions. And important for free speech. But it may be moot at this time and not worth the risk.

Anonymous said...

You must not give in! Its time for the truth to come out! Please someone hack your server! Be safe! We thank you!

unravel MI said...

I was moved by your words of Monday, March 28, 2016. Can you tell me how we should interpret the word prompt, which you are using to judge whether the restraining order should be voided? I can understand why you might wish to back off of your original statement. Either way you've done way more than most people.

"To be clear, if Sibley is not allowed to file his Motion to Modify the Restraining Order and thereafter does not promptly receive a fair and impartial hearing on that Motion, he will justifiably consider the Restraining Order void as a result of being denied such a hearing by the District Court, Circuit Court and now this Court. In that event, Sibley will simply release publicly the Verizon Wireless Subpoena Return records containing the names and addresses of eight hundred fifteen (815) Washington D.C. clients of the D.C. Madam’s escort service."
"Not a threat, but a promise. And, to date, I have been a man of my word."

Anonymous said...

Ted Cruz just dropped out of the race. If he were the alleged candidate who was on the list, it's a bit of a moot point now.
As far as any others that have something to lose when/if the information is released, shine the light in that dark corner anyway.

Casey said...

If it's Cruz, just say "No need to release any names now..."

MITCH WHITENACK said...

You could've been the bombshell and thousands would've rushed to your defense. You waited too long and we don't need ya now. Just enjoy your freedom and go about your life

JOYCE CLEMONS said...

It's not all that moot. He's still a Senator and Mr. Sibley's late client is still dead. Not that I am assuming anything whatever. There is evidence that Hillary's homebrew server was hacked by the Chinese or somebody...certainly Mr. Sibley can't afford fine equipment like she had, her being so "responsible" and well off and all. Certainly there are brilliant Amerigeeks lurking about. Beware!

Carol Lloyd said...

You are prohibited from releasing the call records but are you prohibited from giving information directing as to which election party may be effected? You gave names of corporations involved...can you provide more subtle hints to point us in a direction of where to investigate? It appears to me that most likely the Bush administration (Cruz and Fiorina?) is it moot now that Cruz dropped out of the race or should we continue to investigate?

Anonymous said...

There is no guarantee that it only Republican clients are on that list, right?

Tina R. said...

Although I'm a huge fan of First Amendment rights and I admire your stance on free speech, I'm not sure of the relevancy of the release of this information. It, of course, would offer a nice distraction (and a salacious one, at that) from issues that effect individual's daily lives, but it would have zero effect on real issues.

Obviously, it shows poor judgement on the part of the individual who appears on the list. However, does it truly prevent him/her from doing his/her job?

I think the argument for legalizing prostitution should be revisited. As the law is applied currently, punishment is not dealt equally. Those on the list won't be punished, just publicly shamed. Though, I'm sure, the media would love the chance to increase their ratings.

Think of the amount of tax dollars legalization would generate!

Anonymous said...

If it is Cruz, there is another good reason to release this information. There are many strong Cruz supporters who just can't admit to themselves that this guy is a crooked liar. This deception makes it difficult for them to get behind any other candidate. I think Cruz supporters need to wake up to the fact that they've been gravely deceived by a man claiming to be a devout Christian.

Anonymous said...

I agree 100 percent!! Cruz supporters need a healthy dose of reality.

Anonymous said...

I want to play nice, but why did you start this whole thing if you knew you would never have the support of the courts? You did know that, right?? You can't be that naive. No plan B? Starting to think this has just been some attention seeking. So many of us really thought there was something, but at least for me I don't anymore. Now I'm feeling naive.

May 7, 2016 at 10:04 AM

Rebecca Powell said...

Being in jail won't silence you if it is the releasing of the list that puts you there - and in the company of other known and respected whistle blowers. Once it's listed, the world will jump to your defense. You won't be silenced.

Anonymous said...

Extremely disappointed that we are still in the dark. We have a right to know.

Anonymous said...

Could we please have an update?

Anonymous said...

What the heck is going on? Someone crying wolf!

Post a Comment

Play nice!